Back
NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
AVM J. Rajendra, AVSM, VSM (RETD.), PRESIDING MEMBER, Mr. Anoop Kumar Mendiratta, MEMBER
M/s. Bharti Axa General Insurance Co. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
K. Subbulakshmi – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. this case addresses the interpretation of insurance policy terms regarding overloading. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. the vehicle's damage and the subsequent claim denial are central facts of the case. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. arguments reference the validity and justification of the insurer's repudiation. (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 4. examination of insurer's liability concerning marginal overloading as non-fundamental breach. (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 5. the concluding sections address remedy and compensation based on assessed losses. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
JUDGMENT
AVM J. RAJENDRA, AVSM, VSM (RETD.), PRESIDING MEMBER
1. This Revision Petition is filed under Section 21 (b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (‘the Act’) challenging the Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chennai (‘State Commission’) order dated 28.09.2018 partly allowing FA No.531 of 2012 and setting aside the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Coimbatore (‘District Forum’) order dated 27.06.2012.
2. As per the Registry report, there is 18 days delay in filing this Revision Petition. For the reasons stated in IA/5000/2019, the delay is condoned.
3. For convenience, the parties in the present matter a
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
