ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD Vs. KIRANKUMAR MAFATLAL PARMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ABOVE noted revision petitions are being disposed of by this common order, since facts are similar and common question of law is involved in these petitions.

(2.) IN these petitions, there is challenge to order dated 8.2.2011, passed by State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ahmedabad (short, "State Commission "). Along with these petitions, applications seeking condonation of delay has also been filed. However, no period of delay has been mentioned in any application.

(3.) THE complaints were resisted by the petitioner on the ground that vehicle in question was insured as a private vehicle. In spite of this, there were 17 passengers travelling in the jeep as hired passengers. Accordingly, the vehicle was being used for commercial purpose. Thus, heirs of none of the passengers are entitled to any compensation as per the policy conditions.