Skip to main content

TDCRF reverses earlier order, asks insurance firm to pay claim

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/

Comments

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...

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...

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...