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

SUBHASH CHANDRA, J. RAJENDRA
Shara – Appellant
Versus
Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Co. Ltd. – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Complainants:Mr. Ravikesh K. Sinha, Advocate
For the Opp. Party:Mr. S.M. Tirpathi, Advocate (VC)

ORDER

Subhash Chandra, Presiding Member—This complaint filed under Section 21/22 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (in short, the “Act”) alleges deficiency in service by the Opposite Parties in offering to settle a claim under a valid Combined Fire and Burglary Policy covering the insured premises for an allegedly undervalued amount.

2. Upon notice, Opposite Parties contested the complaint by way of written version. Complainant thereafter filed its rejoinder. Parties filed their evidence by way of affidavit. Short synopsis of arguments was also filed by both the parties. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and carefully considered the material on record and submissions made.

3. The relevant facts of the case, in brief, are that the Complainant is a manufacturer and exporter of fashionable household furnishings located in a Special Economic Zone (SEZ) comprising registered office, show room, go down and manufacturing facilities which is the insured premises. Complainant obtained a Combined Fire and Burglary Policy (the “Policy”) valid from 24.03.2011 to 23.03.2012 in respect of the premises at B-6 & 6A, EPIP, Kasna, Greater Noida, 201305 covering furniture, fixtures an

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