First Appeal No. 96/2014. Case: HDFC Ergo General Insurance Company Limited Vs Prakash Singh Bhandari. Uttaranchal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
|Case Number:||First Appeal No. 96/2014|
|Party Name:||HDFC Ergo General Insurance Company Limited Vs Prakash Singh Bhandari|
|Counsel:||For Appellant: Sudhanshu Dwivedi, Learned Counsel and For Respondents: Amit Agarwal, Learned Counsel|
|Judges:||B.C. Kandpal, J. (President), D.K. Tyagi and Veena Sharma, Members|
|Issue:||Consumer Protection Act, 1986 - Section 15|
|Judgement Date:||January 22, 2015|
|Court:||Uttaranchal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission|
B.C. Kandpal, J. (President)
This is insurer's appeal under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the order dated 10.09.2012 passed by the District Forum, Dehradun in consumer complaint No. 77 of 2010. By the order impugned, the District Forum has allowed the consumer complaint and directed the appellant - opposite party to pay compensation of Rs. 1,47,528/- to the respondent - complainant together with Rs. 10,000/- towards mental agony and Rs. 10,000/- towards litigation expenses within a period of one month from the date of the order, failing which the respondent was also held entitled to interest @9% p.a. on the above amount from the date of filing of the consumer complaint till payment. Briefly stated, the facts of the case as mentioned in the consumer complaint, are that the complainant is the registered owner of vehicle No. UK07-U-0200 (Maruti Alto LXI). The said vehicle was insured with the appellant - HDFC ERGO General Insurance Company Limited for the period from 01.09.2009 to 31.08.2010. During the currency of the insurance policy, the insured vehicle met with an accident on 14.01.2010. The intimation of the accident was given to the insurance company, who appointed surveyor. The complainant lodged the claim with the insurance company, which was repudiated by the insurance company. Thereafter, alleging deficiency in service on the part of the insurance company, the complainant filed a consumer complaint before the District Forum, Dehradun.
The insurance company filed written statement before the District Forum and pleaded that the complainant has wrongly availed the No Claim Bonus from the insurance company by concealment and misrepresentation; that under the previous policy of the vehicle, the complainant has received the claim from the previous insurer, i.e., Reliance General Insurance Company Limited; that the previous insurer of the vehicle had confirmed that the complainant had already taken two claims from them; that the complainant had availed the No Claim Bonus from the insurance company by concealing the above fact and hence the claim was not payable and was rightly repudiated vide letter dated 29.03.2010; that the surveyor has assessed the loss to the tune of Rs. 1,47,528.65/- and that there is no deficiency in service on their part.
The District Forum, on an appreciation of the material on record, allowed the consumer complaint vide impugned order dated 10.09.2012 in the above manner...
To continue readingREQUEST YOUR TRIAL