AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
THIS is a review application filed by the petitioner Askaran Bajaj to review the order dated 14. 10. 2005 passed by this Commission. The review is sought to be made on two grounds. Firstly, that a Bench of one Member of this Commission is not duly constituted Bench and secondly, the question of limitation has not been properly appreciated by this Commission in its impugned order.
WE are afraid that this could not be the grounds of review. However, Section 20 (1a) (ii) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 reads as follows: "a Bench may be constituted by the President with one or more members as the President may deem fit. " In our view a plain reading of this provision makes it abundantly clear that the President of the National Commission can constitute a Bench with one or more Members.
It also needs to be appreciated that as per Section 22 (2) of Consumer Protection Act, 1986, the powers to review which have come to be vested in the National Commission are limited to review our order in case there is ''an error apparent on the face of record''.
WE have very carefully gone through the review application. It appears that the learned Counsel for the petitioner wants this commission to share his perspective or agree with his perspective of the word ''limitation''. This would amount to re-opening of the case and deal with the merits of the issue, which is not envisaged under the powers to review, conferred on this Commission by law. It also needs to be reiterated that this was a case where claim was preferred in 1999 whereas the insured had died in 1994. It is in these circumstances that one has to view the whole question of limitation. In our view the error apparent on the face of record would mean that the facts as they were before this Commission has not been correctly quoted or relied upon. No such instance has been shown, in the absence of which keeping in view the provisions of Section 22 (2), we see no ground to review the impugned order. This review application is devoid of merits, hence dismissed. Review Petition dismissed.