Skip to main content

Oriental Insurance Company asked to pay 1 cr claim for loss

The apex consumer commission has directed an insurance company to pay around Rs one crore claim to three firms, which were insured with it, for their loss caused due to fire in their garments unit in Tripura in 1998.

The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) asked the Oriental Insurance Company Ltd to pay a total of Rs 98,02,863 as claim to Tripura-based firms Sri Priyaluckshmi Garments, Sri Priyaluckshmi Exports and Sri Priyaluckshmi Apparels.

"We direct the opposite parties (insurance company) to pay the complainants (three firms) Rs 98,02,863 (a sum of Rs 74,69,331, Rs 14,25,073 and Rs 9,08,459 respectively)," the bench presided by Justice J M Malik said, adding the amount would be paid with interest from the date of the incident in 1998.

The bench, also comprising member S M Kantikar, directed the insurance company to pay a compensation of Rs five lakh to the three firms.

The bench passed the order on a complaint jointly filed by the three firms against New Delhi and Tripura branches of the insurance company and its Coimbatore-based Divisional Manager.

The garments firms said they had obtained six insurance policies against fire from the insurance company.

The firms told the Commission that on February 21, 1998, a fire had broken out in their factory premises in Tripura, the reason for which was suspected to be an electric short circuit. The firms had claimed a loss of around Rs three crore.

The insurance company was also informed about the mishap, the firms said, adding that after doing surveys over a period of a year, the insurance company had put the blame for the mishap on the complainants.

The insurance company and its officials claimed the firms had failed to produce the documents as required by them and the delay was delay was caused by the companies. It also alleged the fire was not accidental.

 Article referred: http://www.business-standard.com/article/companies/oriental-insurance-company-asked-to-pay-1-cr-claim-for-loss-114051401165_1.html

Comments

Post a Comment

Most viewed this month

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

When debt is bona fide disputed and the defence is a substantial one, the court will not wind up the company

In SHITAL FIBERS LTD.  vs  INDIAN ACRYLICS LIMITED, as per the respondent, appellant had made a payment of Rs.61,83,218/­. However, there was an outstanding balance of Rs.8,92,723/­ as on 28.7.2008. Since despite repeated requests, balance amount was not paid, the respondent issued a statutory notice to the appellant. The same was duly responded to. As the payment was not made despite notice being duly served on the appellant, the respondent filed the aforesaid Company Petition seeking winding up of the present appellant for its inability to pay admitted debts. The learned Company Judge vide order dated 28.9.2015 admitted the Company Petition. However, while doing so, the learned Company Judge observed, that since the appellant was an on­going concern, an opportunity should be granted to it to settle the accounts with the respondent by 31.12.2015. Only in case of failure of the settlement, the citation was directed to be published. On appeal, the Division Bench of the High Cou...
Post a Comment
Read more

Abusing in-laws a ground for divorce: SC

Abusing in-laws and not allowing them to reside in the matrimonial home by a woman amounts to cruelty to her spouse, ground enough for grant of divorce, the Supreme Court has ruled while allowing an NRI's plea for legal separation from his wife. A bench of Justices Vikaramajit Sen and A M Sapre said such incidents could not be termed as "wear and tear" of family life as held by Madras High Court which had said that a couple must be prepared to face such situations in matrimonial relationship. The NRI had filed a divorce petition alleging that his wife was abusive to his family members and did not allow his parents and siblings to stay in his house when they visited the US. Referring to an incident, the husband told the court that his wife had once locked him and his sister out of the house and abused them saying they belonged to a 'prostitute family'. She refused to allow her sister-in-law to enter the house and even lodged a police complaint against her hu...
4 comments
Read more