SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

V.B.GUPTA, SURESH CHANDRA
Balwinder Kaur – Appellant
Versus
Reliance General Insurance – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Petitioner:Mr. U.K. Shandilya, Advocate

ORDER

Petitioner/Complainant has filed present revision petition under Section 21(b) of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short, ‘Act’) against impugned order dated 31.1.2014 passed by State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Punjab (for short, ‘State Commission’) vide which appeal filed by Respondents/Opposite Parties against order dated 8.12.2009 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Patiala (for short, ‘District Forum’) was allowed. Consequently, complaint filed by petitioner before the District Forum was dismissed.

2. Brief facts are, that Petitioner filed a complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (in short, “the Act”) against respondent on the grounds, that she is owner of HTV No.PB-11-AE-9602 which was insured with the respondents vide policy dated 08.12.2007. This vehicle met with an accident and was got repaired under supervision of respondents. Petitioner spent about Rs.2.00 lacs on its repair. Inspite of various request, ultimately vide their letter dated 01.07.2008, respondents repudiated the claim. Thereafter, complaint was filed.

3. In reply, respondents admitted that vehicle was insured with it. However, petitioner gave intim

























































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top