Back
AVM J. RAJENDRA
IDBI Federal Life Insurance Co. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Lakhha K. Panjabi – Respondent
ORDER
This common order addresses four Revision Petitions, No. 998 & 1023 of 2020 filed by IDBI Federal Life Insurance Co. Ltd. and 427 & 428 of 2021 filed by Lakkha K. Panjabi, under Section 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. These petitions challenge orders dated 29.07.2020 passed by the learned State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Gujarat (‘State Commission’) related to Appeal Nos. 1072 and 1015 of 2015. Vide this Order, the State Commission reduced 50% of the claim amount along with an interest @ 7% p.a. from the date of repudiation dated 29.05.2012 till realization and modified the orders of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Ahmedabad (‘District Forum’) dated 31.03.2015.
2. As per report of the Registry, there is some delay in filing of all the Revision Petitions. As the delay occurred during the suspended period of limitation due to Covid-19, all the Revision Petitions are treated to have been filed within limitation.
3. Since the facts and questions of law involved in all the four Revision Petitions are substantially similar, except for variations in dates, events etc., these four Revision Petitions are being disposed of by this common Order. To faci
(1) Policy Document – Any ambiguity in policy documents, especially those regarding disclosure requirements, must be interpreted contra proferentem, favouring the insured.(2) Same cause of Action – C....
(1) Burden of proving the fact which excludes liability of Insurer to pay compensation, lies on Insurer alone and no one else.(2) There is an essential distinction between burden of proof and onus of....
(1) Medical condition – There is a good possibility that the DLA was not aware of his medical condition prior to filling the Proposal Form and OP has not established anything to the contrary.(2) Duty....
(1) Burden of proof – Insurance is a contract of utmost good faith, but the burden of proving that the insured suppressed material facts lies strictly on the Insurer. Exclusionary clauses and allegat....
The burden to prove misrepresentation or suppression of material facts in insurance contracts lies with the insurer, and claims cannot be repudiated without credible evidence.
Revisional Jurisdiction – Revisional jurisdiction of the National Commission is extremely limited, it should be exercised only in case as contemplated within the parameters specified in the provision....
(1) National Commission - National Commission in exercise of its revisional jurisdiction Commission is not required to re-assess and re-appreciate the evidence on record.(2) National Commission - Nat....
1) Per Sec. 45 of Insurance Act, claim can be repudiated, if it is proved that the assured knowingly and fraudulently suppressed the material facts.2) Contractual duty so imposed on the Insured is su....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
