- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15605-DB WP No. 35126 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF WRIT PETITION NO. 35126 OF 2024 (GM-CON) BETWEEN: UMMER KUNHI, S/O ABDUL REHMAN, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, RES/AT BAPPALIGE, PUTTUR KASHA VILLAGE, PUTTUR TALUK, D.K. DIST., KARNATAKA - 574 201. &PETITIONER (BY SRI. KRISHNAMOORTHY D., ADVOCATE) AND: ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., HAVING ITS BRANCH OFFICE AT KRISHNA PRASAD BUILDING, MAIN ROAD, PUTTUR TALUK, D.K. DIST., KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY AT, REGIONAL OFFICE, 44/45, LEO SHOPPING COMPLEX, RESIDENCY ROAD, BENGALURU, KARNATAKA - 560 025. &RESPONDENT (BY SRI. G.S. MARULAIAH., ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by REKHA R Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15605-DB WP No. 35126 of 2024 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE, A WRIT OF CERTIORARI, QUASHING THE ORDER IMPUGNED DATED:12.09.2024 IN REVISION PETITION NO.1800/2023 BY THE LEARNED NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDDRESSAL COMMISSION PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-C AND ALLOW THE WRIT PETITION AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH) This writ petition has been filed impugning the order dated 12.09.2024 passed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in Revision Petition No.1800/2023 preferred by the petitioner against the order dated 06.07.2022, passed by the Karnataka State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in Appeal No.742/2014 preferred by the respondent-Insurance Company. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15605-DB WP No. 35126 of 2024 2. The petitioner had filed a complaint before the District Forum, claiming compensation for his vehicle bearing registration No.KA-19/AA-9500, which was insured with the respondent-Insurance Company, and met with an accident on 23.05.2011. The petitioner's claim for damages was repudiated, and therefore, he filed the complaint before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Mangalore. The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Mangalore by the order dated 28.02.2014 in Complaint No.226/2012 allowed the complaint and directed the respondent- Insurance Company to pay Rs.1,20,000/- (Rupees One Lakh twenty thousand only) to the complainant along with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of accident till the date of payment and also to pay Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two thousand only) as cost of litigation expenses. 3. This order came to be challenged by the Insurance Company in Appeal No.742/2014 before the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission. The - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15605-DB WP No. 35126 of 2024 appeal was filed with delay of 57 days. The appeal was allowed and the order passed by the District Forum was set aside, on the ground that as per the survey report, the Insurance Company was ready to pay an amount of Rs.27,800/-, but the petitioner/complainant did not accept this amount and there was no evidence for suffering the damages of Rs.1,20,000/- as awarded by the District Forum. 4. Being aggrieved by the said order, the complainant/petitioner had filed the revision petition. The revision petition had been dismissed only on the ground of delay of 59 days. 5. The approach of the National Commission is highly technical. The Consumer Protection Act is a beneficial legislation. There is only one place of sitting i.e., New Delhi, where the National Consumer Disputes Commission holds its sitting. The person from Mangalore has to travel all the way to Delhi to file the Revision Petition and the delay of 59 days was not an enormous or - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15605-DB WP No. 35126 of 2024 exorbitant, which could not have been condoned. We therefore, condone the delay of 59 days in filing the Revision Petition and set aside the impugned order passed by the National Commission and remand the matter back to the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission to decide the matter. 6. Accordingly, writ petition is allowed. Sd/- (D K SINGH) JUDGE Sd/- (T.M.NADAF) JUDGE RR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 31 ct-vn