Back
VINOD S. BHARDWAJ
Bombay Bihar Goods Carrier – Appellant
Versus
Permanent Lok Adalat (Public Utility Services) – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Mr. Vinod S. Bhardwaj, J.(Oral)
Challenge in the present writ petition is to the award dated 19.09.2022 passed by the Permanent Lok Adalat (Public Utility Services), Faridabad, whereby petition No.2182 of 2017, filed by the petitioner under Section 22-C of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, seeking payment of loss on account of theft of the vehicle, has been dismissed.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner-company is owner of vehicle bearing registration No HR-38-S-4144 which was stolen by some unknown persons on the intervening night of 29/30.12.2014 when the said vehicle was parked in front of the house of the friend of the driver Ram Avadh. The theft was detected in the morning of 30.12.2014 and the matter was promptly reported to the police. The information was also sent by the petitioner on the toll free number issued by the insurance company and was also given to the Police Station but the police did not take any action in the matter and asked the driver to carry out the search of the vehicle on his own level whereupon the owner and driver of the vehicle searched the vehicle in the States of Rajasthan Delhi and Uttar Pradesh but the
The Permanent Lok Adalat must assess the merits of insurance claims and cannot substitute its reasoning for that of the insurance company, especially in cases of procedural lapses.
The Permanent Lok Adalat has jurisdiction over insurance claims, and while due process was followed, the award must reflect the depreciated value of repairs.
There is nothing wrong in deciding the matter based on evidence adduced in the earlier round of litigation
Mandatory nature of conciliation proceedings under Section 22C of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, and the influence of the decision in Canara Bank Vs. G.S. Jayarama (2022) 7 SCC 776 on the ....
Point of Law : Plea of limitation taken up in the present case on the strength of clause 20 of the agreement read with Article 44 of the Schedule appended to the Limitation Act, would not defeat the ....
An insurer cannot reject a valid claim based on procedural delays; the rights of the insured must be upheld in cases of serious injury, reflecting the principles of equity and justice.
Permanent Lok Adalat has jurisdiction to adjudicate compensation claims under the Motor Vehicles Act after conciliation efforts fail, affirming its authority and established processes.
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
