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

DAYA CHAUDHARY, URVASHI AGNIHOTRI
D. M. Industries – Appellant
Versus
New India Assurance Company Limited – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Appellant:Sh. Rishabh Gupta, Advocate

JUDGMENT

Urvashi Agnihotri, Member.—Appellant-M/s D M Industries has filed the present appeal against the Order dated 18.11.2021 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Bathinda, (in short, “The District Commission”), whereby the complaint filed by M/s D M Industries against The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. & Anr.-opposite parties (in short “OPs”) has been partly allowed with the following directions to OPNo.1:-

“Resultantly, this complaint is partly allowed with Rs.10,000/- as cost and compensation against opposite party No.1. The opposite party No.1 is directed to pay to complainant Rs.2,07,829/- with interest @ 9% w.e.f. 3-5-2017 (date of repudiation) till the date of payment.”

2. Briefly stated, as per the version of the complainant Pardeep Mangla being the sole Proprietor of M/s DM Industries he was running business of manufacturing and repairing of power and distribution transformers at Bathinda for his livelihood. The Complainant Firm was having its Cash Credit Limit account of Rs.1,00,00,000/- with OP No.2 and no claim or relief was sought against it. He purchased Insurances (For Fire etc.) of the stocks for the amount of Rs.1,00,00,000/- from OP No.

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