Skip to main content

Cannot go against surveyor report: Consumer forum

The Thane District Consumer Redressal Forum has pulled up the New India Assurance Company for refusing to accept an insurance claim of a businessman on the grounds that rainwater and not flood water had destroyed his goods.

Citing that the insurance company's defense to refuse claim on such technical grounds as unjust, the forum has directed the company to pay a compensation of Rs 20,000 and insurance of Rs 8.46 lakh at six per cent interest to Ajay Shivnani of M/s Satyam Distributors. His goods were destroyed in heavy rains in 2009. In his complaint, Shivnani told the forum that he took an insurance of Rs 15 lakh for goods stored in a warehouse between May 26, 2009 and May 25, 2010. Shivnani said despite his attempts to shift the goods to dry area, heavy rains on October 4 and 5, 2009 destroyed a huge chunk of goods estimated to be worth Rs 11.74 lakh.

The complainant immediately informed the insurance company, which on October 6, sent their investigator Surendra Kumar Kalra to verify Shivnani's claims. Kalra, in his report on October 26, 2009, accepted goods were destroyed in the rains but valued the loss of goods at Rs 8.46 lakh and not Rs 11.44 lakh as demanded by Shivnani.

The company, however, refused to pay the claim to Shivnani citing the above technical point.

The forum, after going through the insurance papers, said the company was not justified in raising such technical grounds when their own investigator had verified and accepted Shivnani's claim after which they passed the order.

 Article referred: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/thane/Dont-refuse-claim-on-technical-grounds-Consumer-forum/articleshow/34341364.cms

 Comment:
The above contention of the Ld. Forum appears to be opposed to the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the Sri Venkateswara Syndicate vs Oriental Insurance Company, wherein the Hon'ble court clearly stated "under the Insurance Act, the assistance of a surveyor should be taken but the insurer was not bound to accept his opinion. The insurer can depute another surveyor and accept the latter view. The court would interfere only if the rejection of the survey report is arbitrary or malafide."

Comments

Post a Comment

Most viewed this month

Michigan House Approves 'Right-to-Work' Bill

Amid raucous protests, the Republican-led Michigan House approved a contentious right-to-work bill on  Dec 11 limiting unions' strength in the state where the (Union for American Auto Workers)  UAW was born. The chamber passed a measure dealing with public-sector workers 58-51 as protesters shouted "shame on you" from the gallery and huge crowds of union backers massed in the state Capitol halls and on the grounds. Backers said a right-to-work law would bring more jobs to Michigan and give workers freedom. Critics said it would drive down wages and benefits. The right-to-work movement has been growing in the country since Wisconsin fought a similar battle with unions over two years ago. Michigan would become the 24th state to enact right-to-work provisions, and passage of the legislation would deal a stunning blow to the power of organized labor in the United States. Wisconsin Republicans in 2011 passed laws severely restricting the power of public s...
Post a Comment
Read more

Power to re-assess by AO and disclosure of material facts

In AVTEC Limited v. DCIT, the division of the Delhi High Court held that AO is bound to look at the litigation history of the assessee and cannot expect the assessee to inform him.  In the instant case, the Petitioner, engaged in the business of manufacturing and selling of automobiles, power trains and power shift transmissions along with their components, approached the High Court challenging the re-assessment order passed against them. For the year 2006-07, the Petitioner entered into a Business Transfer Agreement with Hindustan Motors Ltd, as per which, the Petitioner took over the business from HML.  While filing income tax return for the said year, the petitioner claimed the expenses incurred in respect of professional and legal charges for the purpose of taking over of the business from HML as capital expenses and claimed depreciation. Article referred: http://www.taxscan.in/assessing-officer-bound-look-litigation-history-assessee-delhi-hc-read-order/8087/
Post a Comment
Read more

The recovery of vehicles by the financier not an offence - SC

Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 8907  of 2009 Anup Sarmah (Petitioner) Vs Bhola Nath Sharma & Ors.(Respondents) The petitioner submitted that  respondents-financer had forcibly taken away the vehicle financed by them and  illegally deprived the petitioner from its lawful possession  and  thus,  committed  a crime. The complaint filed by the petitioner had been  entertained  by  the Judicial Magistrate (Ist Class), Gauhati (Assam) in Complaint Case  No.  608 of 2009, even directing the interim custody of the vehicle (Maruti  Zen)  be given to the petitioner vide order dated  17.3.2009.  The respondent on approaching the Guwahati High  Court against this order, the hon'ble court squashed the criminal  proceedings  pending   before  the  learned Magistrate. After hearing both sides, the Hon'ble Supreme Court decided on 30th...
7 comments
Read more