Skip to main content

Insurance company told to pay Rs 15.87L compensation

The Pune district consumer disputes redressal forum has directed a private insurance company to pay Rs 15.87 lakh to a customer for deficient service by wrongly repudiating his insurance claim for damage caused by fire to his new car and for causing mental and physical agony. The forum dismissed the complaint against the car manufacturer and the dealer.

The complainant, Kishor L Nimhan, had purchased a new Skoda car for Rs 16.44 lakh from Acumen Motors Private Limited, Aundh, in 2006. He got the car insured for Rs 15.62 lakh with the Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Company Limited for a period between November 21, 2006, and November 30, 2007, and paid a premium of Rs 61,535 for the same.

On June 6, 2007, the car caught fire while it was in a stationary, switched-off mode in the parking place at Nimhan's residence. He had then reported the matter to the police and the car manufacturer as the vehicle was badly damaged. In the ensuing developments, Nimhan sent notices to both Skoda and Royal Sundaram Alliance, but a dispute prevailed between the car manufacturer and the insurance firm over who should pay for the damage.

The insurance firm insisted that it was not liable to pay for damages because the fire was the result of manufacturing defect.

The car manufacturer, on the other hand, insisted that there was no manufacturing defect as Nimhan had used the vehicle without any problem for six months from the date of purchase and for over 7,500 km.

The two-member consumer court bench, comprising president V P Utpat and member Geeta Ghatge, had to hire expert services of the Automotive Research Association of India (ARAI) to establish whether the fire in the car had resulted out of any manufacturing defect. Relying on the ARAI's report, which concluded that there was no manufacturing defect, the forum gave its considered opinion that there was no cause of action against the car manufacturer, but the complainant was entitled to the sum insured, besides the claim of compensation from the insurance firm.

Nimhan's lawyer Bhalchandra Nikte said, "The forum has directed payment of the insured sum and the compensation within six months from the date of receipt of its order, passed on April 23. In case of a default, the amount shall carry interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of the complaint, i.e. December 7, 2007." Counsel Rhishikesh Ganu appeared for Skoda in the case.

Article referred: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/pune/Insurance-company-told-to-pay-Rs-15-87L-compensation/articleshow/34444321.cms

Comments

Post a Comment

Most viewed this month

Appellate authorities under Special Statutes cannot be asked to condone delay

Madras High Court in R.Gowrishankar vs. The Commissioner of Service Tax has held that Appellate authorities cannot be asked to condone the delay, beyond the extended period of limitation A Division Bench comprising of Justices S. Manikumar and D. Krishnakumar, made this observation while considering an appeal filed against Single Bench order declining to set aside the order made in the condone delay petition filed by the petitioner to condone 223 days in filing the appeal before the Commissioner of Service Tax (Appeals). Article referred: http://www.livelaw.in/appellate-authorities-special-statutes-cannot-asked-condone-delay-beyond-extended-period-limitation-madras-hc/
Post a Comment
Read more

'Seize assets to pay damages to accident victim'

Her story might be an inspiration for the physically challenged but justice has remained elusive for her. In 2008, a bus accident left research engineer S Thenmozhi, 30, paraplegic. In April 2013, the motor accident claims tribunal directed the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (TNSTC) to provide her a compensation of 57.9 lakh. However, TNSTC refused to budge and on Tuesday a city court ordered attaching of movable assets of the transport corporation. Thenmozhi was employed in C-DOT, a telecom technology development centre in Bangalore. On July 21, 2008, she was coming to Chennai in a private bus. Around 2am, the bus had a flat tyre and the driver parked it on the left side of the road near Pallikonda in Vellore district on the Bangalore-Chennai highway. While the tyre was being changed, a TNSTC bus of Dharmapuri division hit the stationary bus. The rear part of the bus was smashed and passengers were injured. Thenmozhi who had a seat at the back of the bus suffered...
Post a Comment
Read more

Mumbai ITAT rules income of offshore discretionary trust is subject to tax in India

The Mumbai Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has recently determined the following issue in the affirmative in the case of Manoj Dhupelia: Should the income of an offshore discretionary trust be subject to tax in India, if no distributions have been made to beneficiaries in India? The question arose from appeals filed by individual beneficiaries in relation to a Lichtenstein-based trust, the Ambrunova Trust and Merlyn Management SA (the Trust) with the ITAT. It is important to note that the individuals in this case were amongst those first identified by the Government of India (GOI) as holding undeclared bank accounts in Lichtenstein. The ITAT ruling raises the following issues: Taxation of Trust Corpus: ITAT classified the corpus of the trust as "undisclosed income" and declared it taxable in the hands of the beneficiaries. Taxation of Undistributed Income: ITAT refused to draw a distinction between the corpus and undistributed income from the trust and declared i...
Post a Comment
Read more