Back
SUBHASH CHANDRA, J. RAJENDRA
National Insurance Company Limited – Appellant
Versus
Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. – Respondent
ORDER
Subhash Chandra, Presiding Member—This revision petition challenges the order dated 27.10.2016 of the Haryana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Panchkula (in short, ‘the State Commission’) in Appeal no. 564 of 2016 upholding the order of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Panipat (in short, ‘the District Forum’) directing the respondent nos.1 to 4 jointly and severally to pay the complainant the insured amount along with interest and compensation as ordered by the District Forum.
2. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have carefully perused the material on record.
3. The relevant facts of the case, in brief, are that the husband of the complainant before the District Forum (Late Ram Singh) was an employee of respondent no.1 covered under a Group Personal Accident Insurance Policy obtained by respondent no.1- Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd., (in short, “UHBVNL”) from respondent no.4 insurance company for Rs.5.00 lakh each. The policy was valid from 17.07.2011 to 16.07.2012. The said Ram Singh expired in a road accident on 10.03.2012. Respondent nos.2 and 3 delayed the processing of the claim of the insurance under this scheme. Th
(1) Delay – The State Commission has also fallen into error in fastening the liability only on the insurance company which for the reasons stated above was not liable under the policy conditions in v....
Personal Accident Insurance Policy – Surveyor’s report is not the final word if it can be established that it was arbitrary or perverse.
The validity of an insurance claim is contingent upon the existence and operation of the insurance coverage at the time of the insured event, as per the terms of the insurance agreement.
“Delay in information” - the occurrence being occurred with the currency of the policy and there being the report made to the police, the delay in informing the OP No.1 & 2 cannot be repudiated to de....
(1) Insurance is contract and nothing shall be presumed which is written down in the contract.(2) Jurisdiction conferred on National Commission under Section 21 (b) of Act has been transgressed
“Life Insurance claim cannot be repudiated provided the case of insured is covered under exclusion clause.”
The need for documented proof establishing a direct nexus between the accident/injury and the death of the insured employee in insurance claim cases.
Inactive Policy – If a policy is not active, the claim for the Accident Benefit is not payable to the complainants as per the terms outlined in the insurance contract.
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
