Skip to main content

Insurance company told to shell out Rs 13 lakh for refusing claim

 A district consumer forum on June 19 directed an insurance company to pay a local resident his claimed amount of Rs 12,53,335 and a legal cost of Rs50,000 for repudiating an insurance claim. The New India Assurance Company had refused the claim amount on grounds that the driver of the insured vehicle, involved in accident, had a fake driving licence.

According to the case, Sarabjit Singh had got his vehicle insured with the company, which was valid from February 28, 2013 to February 27, 2014. In an accident near Ranchi in March 24, 2013, the vehicle got completely smashed. Following this, Singh had immediately informed the insurance company officials.

According to Singh, the company had carried out a spot-survey of the vehicle, and following the advice of their examiner, he had the vehicle transported to Mohali by spending more than Rs 50,000 as carriage charge. After this, Singh had submitted relevant documents along with an estimated claim of Rs 12,53,335 and his driving licence to the insurance company. However, the insurance company had refused the claim stating the licence of the driver was fake.

In the forum, Singh successfully proved that his licence was not fake and that he had applied for renewal of licence. Deciding the case in favour of Singh, the court observed, "Barely non-deposit of licence fee cannot make the driving licence of the driver invalid. The driver has made the proper fee against receipt. Therefore, this ground of fake licence for repudiating the claim of the complainant does not hold." 

The court directed the company to pay Rs 12,53,335, the insured cost of the vehicle at 9% interest from the date of refutation of the letter. Besides this, it also ordered the company to pay Rs 50,000 towards the cost of lawsuit and as compensation for psychological harassment. 

The court judgment had come on June 19.

Article referred: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/chandigarh/Insurance-company-told-to-shell-out-Rs-13-lakh/articleshow/37105421.cms

Comments

Post a Comment

Most viewed this month

Partition proceedings are vitiated even if single co-sharer is not made party or is not served in accordance with law

Cause Title :  Bhagwant Singh vs  Financial Commissioner (Appeals) Punjab, Chandigarh,  CWP-2132-2018 (O&M), High Court Of Punjab & Haryana At Chandigarh Date of Judgment/Order : 31.08.2022 Corum : Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sudhir Mittal Background A large parcel of land was owned by the Nagar Panchayat. Thereafter, some of the co-sharers sold their shares to third parties including the petitioners herein. On 22.11.1995, respondents No.3 to 5 filed an application for partition of the land. The petitioners were not impleaded as parties.  On completion of proceedings, sanad was issued on 28.08.1996. Vide two separate sale deeds dated 28.05.2008 respondents No.3 and 5 sold some portion in favour of respondent No.6 and 7. These respondents sought implementation of the sanad resulting in issuance of warrants of possession dated 05.06.2008. Allegedly, it was then that the petitioners realized that joint land had been partitioned and that proceedings h...
Post a Comment
Read more

Power of Attorney holder can also file cheque bounce cases: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has held that a criminal complaint in a cheque bounce case can be filed and pursued by a person who holds a power of attorney (PoA) on behalf of the complainant. A three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice P Sathasivam gave the "authoritative" pronouncement on the issue, referred to it by a division bench in view of conflicting judgements of some high courts and the apex court. "We are of the view that the power of attorney holder may be allowed to file, appear and depose for the purpose of issue of process for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (which deals with cheque bounce cases)," the bench, also comprising justices Ranjana Prakash Desai and Ranjan Gogoi, said. The bench, in its judgement, said, "...we clarify the position and answer the questions in the following manner: "Filing of complaint petition under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act through PoA holder is perfectly legal...
1 comment
Read more

Christian who reconverts as Hindu SC will get quota benefits

Amid the controversy over “ghar wapsi”, the Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that a person who “reconverts” from Christianity to Hinduism shall be entitled to reservation benefits if his forefathers belonged to a Scheduled Caste and the community accepts him after “reconversion”. Citing articles by B R Ambedkar and James Massey, and reports by Mandal Commission and Chinappa Commission, the court said: “There has been detailed study to indicate the Scheduled Caste persons belonging to Hindu religion, who had embraced Christianity with some kind of hope or aspiration, have remained socially, educationally and economically backward.” The bench of Justices Dipak Misra and V Gopala Gowda held that a person shall not be deprived of reservation benefits if he decides to “reconvert” to Hinduism and adopts the caste that his forefathers originally belonged to just because he was born to Christian parents or has a Christian spouse. Expanding the scope of a previous Constitution benc...
1 comment
Read more