A consumer forum here has set aside its earlier order rejecting a transporter’s claim for his stolen truck and has now ordered an insurance firm to pay Rs 8.21 lakh to him.
The Thane District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (TDCRF) had in February rejected the Rs 14 lakh claim of Bhiwandi-based transporter Jaykant Bhagawati Prasad Pandey for his stolen truck, while observing that just because the branch office of any organisation is located within the forum’s jurisdiction, the claim cannot be lodged with it.
Pandey had filed the claim with the Thane office of the New India Assurance company, while he had taken the insurance policy from the firm’s Santa Cruz office.
He had informed the forum that in 2009, when his truck was going from Mumbai to Patna, some persons got into the vehicle and after giving tranquiliser to the driver, they threw him out and escaped with the truck.
Pandey had then sought a claim from the insurance firm which rejected it on the ground that the truck driver had given lift to three persons with an intention to earn money. This is clear violation of the contract of insurance and hence, the claim cannot be honoured, the insurance firm said.
Subsequently, Pandey approached the TDCRF and claimed Rs 14 lakhs, including Rs 10,95,000 as cost of the truck, Rs 1 lakh for mental sufferings, Rs 1.85 lakh interest and Rs 25,000 as legal expenses.
In his claim, Pandey had made the insurance firm’s Thane office as respondent and had neither included the head office nor the Santa Cruz branch from where he took the policy.
Just because the branch office (of respondent company) is situated in jurisdiction of the consumer forum, the claim cannot be lodged with it, the TDCRF then said in its order.
Later, Pandey challenged the forum’s order.
After going through the matter, TDCRF president Umesh Jhawalikar and member N D Kadam recently observed that the surveyor’s report and the complaint filed with local police concluded that the truck was stolen and could not be traced.
The respondent had no valid reason to reject the claim as the truck was in possession of a licenced driver for transporting goods, and it had been stolen during the insurance validity period, the forum noted.
The respondent had argued that the driver had given lift to outsiders in the truck which was illegal and during the period the vehicle had been stolen.
In this connection, the TDCRF noted that as the truck had been stolen during the validity of the insurance policy, rejecting the claim on technical grounds of violation of terms and conditions is not justified.
Citing certain earlier directions of National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission, the forum ordered the insurance company to pay Rs 8,21,000 to the claimant and also Rs 50,000 for his legal and other expenses.
Article referred: http://freepressjournal.in/tdcrf-reverses-earlier-order-asks-insurance-firm-to-pay-claim/
The Thane District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (TDCRF) had in February rejected the Rs 14 lakh claim of Bhiwandi-based transporter Jaykant Bhagawati Prasad Pandey for his stolen truck, while observing that just because the branch office of any organisation is located within the forum’s jurisdiction, the claim cannot be lodged with it.
Pandey had filed the claim with the Thane office of the New India Assurance company, while he had taken the insurance policy from the firm’s Santa Cruz office.
He had informed the forum that in 2009, when his truck was going from Mumbai to Patna, some persons got into the vehicle and after giving tranquiliser to the driver, they threw him out and escaped with the truck.
Pandey had then sought a claim from the insurance firm which rejected it on the ground that the truck driver had given lift to three persons with an intention to earn money. This is clear violation of the contract of insurance and hence, the claim cannot be honoured, the insurance firm said.
Subsequently, Pandey approached the TDCRF and claimed Rs 14 lakhs, including Rs 10,95,000 as cost of the truck, Rs 1 lakh for mental sufferings, Rs 1.85 lakh interest and Rs 25,000 as legal expenses.
In his claim, Pandey had made the insurance firm’s Thane office as respondent and had neither included the head office nor the Santa Cruz branch from where he took the policy.
Just because the branch office (of respondent company) is situated in jurisdiction of the consumer forum, the claim cannot be lodged with it, the TDCRF then said in its order.
Later, Pandey challenged the forum’s order.
After going through the matter, TDCRF president Umesh Jhawalikar and member N D Kadam recently observed that the surveyor’s report and the complaint filed with local police concluded that the truck was stolen and could not be traced.
The respondent had no valid reason to reject the claim as the truck was in possession of a licenced driver for transporting goods, and it had been stolen during the insurance validity period, the forum noted.
The respondent had argued that the driver had given lift to outsiders in the truck which was illegal and during the period the vehicle had been stolen.
In this connection, the TDCRF noted that as the truck had been stolen during the validity of the insurance policy, rejecting the claim on technical grounds of violation of terms and conditions is not justified.
Citing certain earlier directions of National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission, the forum ordered the insurance company to pay Rs 8,21,000 to the claimant and also Rs 50,000 for his legal and other expenses.
Article referred: http://freepressjournal.in/tdcrf-reverses-earlier-order-asks-insurance-firm-to-pay-claim/
Comments
Post a Comment