Skip to main content

Insurance claim denied as driver left vehicle unlocked

The apex consumer commission has dismissed a man's plea seeking insurance claim for his stolen truck, holding that there was "negligence" on the part of the driver who had left the vehicle "unlocked".

National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission bench, presided by Justice J M Malik, dismissed the petition filed by Rajasthan resident Jagdish Prasad Bakshi who had sought insurance claim for his stolen truck, saying he has not come before it with clean hands.

"In case truck was locked, its key was not produced either before the police or before surveyor. The truck remained on spot unlocked for half an hour. Surveyor of the insurance company has reported that when the driver left for having tea, he left the key inside the truck. The complainant has not come to the court with clean hands," the bench, also comprising its member S M Kantikar, said.

The bench said it "is quite possible that driver may be working in cahoots with the thief".

It said the first and foremost duty of the driver was to produce the key before the police.

"However, the needful was not done. That is fatal. This clearly reveals negligence, inaction and passivity on the part of the driver," the commission said.

Bakshi had approached the apex consumer commission with his revision petition challenging an order passed by the Rajasthan State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission which had dismissed his plea for insurance claim on the ground that the driver was negligent in taking care of the truck as he left the key inside the truck.

The driver of the truck had stopped the vehicle at 3 AM in front of a roadside eatery situated along a highway in Rajasthan. When the driver returned, he could not find the truck there. An FIR was lodged in which it was stated that the vehicle was locked.

When he approached the insurance company for the claim, his plea was rejected and he moved consumer forum seeking a direction to Oriental Insurance Company to pay him the insured amount.

 Article referred: http://www.business-standard.com/article/pti-stories/insurance-claim-denied-as-driver-left-vehicle-unlocked-114052900837_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