Anand Kumar VS Divisional Manager, National Insurance Company Ltd.

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

SUBHASH CHANDRA, SADHNA SHANKER
Anand Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Divisional Manager, National Insurance Company Ltd. – Respondent

Counsel for the Parties:
For the Appellant:Mr. A. K. Anand, Advocate
For the Respondent No.1 and 2:Ms. Shantha Devi Raman, Advocate With Mr. Mayank R. Yadav, Advocate
For the Respondent No.3 and 4:Mr. Aditya Kumar, Advocate With Ms. Anjana Nigam and Mr. ILA Nath, Advocates

ORDER

Dr. Sadhna Shanker, Member.—The present appeal has been filed under Section 19 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short “the Act”) by Anand Kumar (hereinafter referred to as the “complainant”) assailing the Order dated 07.10.2022 passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, U.P. (hereinafter referred to as the “State Commission”) in complaint No. 278 of 2018, whereby the complaint was rejected.

2. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant (hereinafter referred to as the ‘complainant’), learned counsel for the National Insurance Company Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the ‘insurance company’), learned counsel for the Bank of India (hereinafter referred to as the ‘bank’) and have perused the record.

3. The facts, in brief, are that the complainant took home loan of Rs. 22 lakh for purchase of H. No. 103/2 , Sunderbag, Hewet Road, Lucknow from the bank and as a statutory requirements, the bank had purchased ‘Home Loan Suraksha Bima’ for the insurance of the house in question for a sum insured of Rs. 30 lakh, through their corporate partners ‘National Insurance Company Limited’. The premium of Rs.15,716/- was paid. The policy was valid from 28.03.