Back
NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
AVM JONNALAGADDA RAJENDRA, President, ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA, Member
National Insurance Company Limited Divisional Office Mandi – Appellant
Versus
Kanti Lal – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. claim arising from an accident where insurance company did not meet burden of proof. (Para 1 , 3) |
| 2. insurance company's repudiation is primarily challenged on grounds of alcohol influence. (Para 4 , 11) |
| 3. court reiterated that unproved documents cannot substantiate claims or defenses. (Para 10 , 12 , 16) |
| 4. affirmation of lower forum's decision based on inadequate proof by the insurance company. (Para 19) |
JUDGMENT
AVM JONNALAGADDA RAJENDRA, AVSM, VSM
1. This Revision Petition No. 241 of 2018 challenges the order of Himachal Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Shimla (‘the State Commission’) dated 04.12.2017m vide which the State Commission dismissed First Appeal No. 116/2017 and affirmed the order of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Kullu, H.P (‘the District Forum’) dated 19.01.2017.
2. For convenience, the parties are referred to as placed in the original Complaint filed before the District Forum.
3. Brief facts of the case, as per the Complainant, are that he is the registered owner of Taxi Regn No. HP-01K-3851. He insured the vehicle with the Opposite Party (OP) insurer and the policy was valid up to 24.12.2014. The insured vehicle h
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
