Skip to main content

Consumer forum asks insurance firm to settle car's theft claim

 consumer forum here has asked an insurance company to settle a claim relating to the theft of a car, saying the firm took a "super-technical view" in rejecting the claim.

New Delhi Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, presided by C K Chaturvedi, asked The New India Insurance Company Ltd, with which the vehicle was insured, to settle the car's theft claim filed by a Delhi-based couple Preeti Roy and Pratik Chandra Roy.

The couple had approached the forum claiming Preeti, who was owner of the car, had later on transferred the vehicle in the name of her husband Pratik.

The car was stolen and thereafter Pratik approached the insurance company for theft claim.

The firm had rejected the claim stating that on the day of the theft, the husband had not got insurance policy transferred in his own name.

The forum said "the opposite party (insurance company) is taking a super-technical view of the matter without any solid basis. In law, the husband acts for the wife also."

The forum noted that the car was stolen on December 27, 2008, after physical transfer and application to RTO for change of registration certificate (R/C) in the husband's name on December 16, 2008.

"It is a case of technical violation in terms of Motor Vehicle Policy and opposite party (insurance company) should settle the claim on non-standard basis as the matter is of transfer between husband and wife who constitute one unit of family and it is not a case of two strangers," the forum, also comprising its member S R Chaudhary, said.

The company had also repudiated the claim on the ground that both the transferor and the transferee have to request for change of R/C and his wife has not requested for transfer.

 Article referred: http://www.business-standard.com/article/pti-stories/consumer-forum-asks-insurance-firm-to-settle-car-s-theft-claim-114060501237_1.html

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