Back
MADHYA PRADESH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BHOPAL
Shri Uday Raj Singh Parmar, J
complainant – Appellant
Versus
opposite party – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. accident and insurance claim denial due to ownership transfer. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments made regarding insurable interest. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. court's evaluation of evidence regarding ownership transfer. (Para 7 , 8 , 10) |
| 4. interpretation of ownership under the motor vehicles act. (Para 9) |
| 5. final ruling dismissing the appeal. (Para 11 , 12) |
1. This appeal by the complainant / appellant is directed against the order dated 11.7.2013 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Sagar (for short the ˜District Commission') in CC No.162/2011 whereby the complaint filed by him is dismissed.
2. Briefly stated, facts of the case as narrated by the complainant are that he is the owner of ˜Tata Indica' car bearing registration No. MH 12 BG - 2047, which is insured with the opposite party for a period w.e.f. 10.9.2009 to 9.9.2010 for an insured declared value of Rs. 1,35,000. In the midnight of 7.11.2009 the subject vehicle, which was being driven by the complainant's driver, met with an accident regarding which a claim was lodged with the opposite party. The opposite party vide letter dated 27.3.2010 repudiated the complainant's claim stating that he has n
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
