Date of filing :20.10.2018 Date of order :30.01.2025 MAHARASHTRA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL COMMISSION,MUMBAI, BENCH AT AURANGABAD.

FIRST APPEAL NO. : 439 OF 2018 IN COMPLAINT CASE NO.: 22 OF 2018 DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM : AURANGABAD Siddharth Rajkumar Charkha, …APPELLANT R/o IB No.11, Kasliwal Marvel(West) (Adv.S.T.Agrawal )

Beed Bye-Pass Road, Satara, Aurangabad 431 010.

VERSUS

1. Shriram General Insurance Co.Ltd. …RESPONDENT E-8, EPIP, Sitapura Industrial Area, ( Adv.M.C.Mene )

Jaipur (Rajasthan) 302022, Through its Managing Director.

2. Shriram General Insurance Co.Ltd., 1st floor, Office No.109 & 110, Chetan Trade Centre, Opp.S.F.S. School, Jalna Road, Aurangabad.

CORAM : Milind.S.Sonawane, Hon’ble Presiding Member.

Dr.Nisha.A.Chavhan, Hon’ble Member, Nagesh.C.Kumbre, Hon’ble Member.

J U D G M E N T (Delivered on 30/01/2025)

Per Dr.Nisha Amol Chavhan, Hon’ble Member.

This is an appeal challenging the correctness and legality of the judgment and order passed by the ld. Majority of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Aurangabad (‘District Commission’ for short) in Consumer Complaint No.22/2018. In the said case, majority of the District Commission has been dismissed the complaint and Ld. Single member has been allow the complaint and directed the respondent i.e. insurance company to pay insurance amount of Rs. 22,391/- along with 10% interest and also directed to pay Rs. 5000/- towards the compensation to the complainant.

2. Being aggrieved by the order passed by the ld. Majority of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Aurangabad in the consumer complaint 22/2018 on 10/09/2018, Appellant filed an appeal on the following grounds against the dismissal of the complaint.

3. That, Ld. District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Aurangabad failed to consider that respondent insurance company failed to prove the ground of the repudiation as regards to the declaration on ‘No claim Bonus’ alleges to have been submitted by the appellant at the time of issuance of the policy by filling the copy of alleged declaration form on record.

4. Ld. District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Aurangabad failed to consider that, it is settled principle of law that burden of prove the ground of the repudiation is always on the insurance company. In the present case, the insurance company failed and neglected to discharge the said burden.

5. Ld. District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Aurangabad failed to consider that, at the time of issuance of the policy, any declaration form was not obtained by the respondents, therefore no question of any false declaration alleged to have been made by the appellant arises.

6. Ld. District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Aurangabad wrongly held that complainant was aware that extra premium is not charged to him etc. The Ld. District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Aurangabad failed to consider that blank cheque was handed over to the insurance company, therefore no question of less or extra charging of premium arises. 7. Ld. District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Aurangabad wrongly held that, at the time of issuance of policy, complainant has not declared necessary information and as such violated the terms and conditions of the policy and such complainant is not entitled for compensation.

8. It is therefore prayed by appellant that appeal may be allowed and order passed by the Majority of Ld. District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Aurangabad may be quashed and set aside.

9. The facts giving rise to the appeal, in brief, are as such that, the appellant i.e. original complainant purchased new RENAULT KWID car on 30/3/2016. The appellant purchased insurance policy from Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd. after completion of the one year, the appellant purchased fresh insurance policy from the respondent by handing over blank cheque to the respondent as the exact amount could not be ascertained by him personally.

10. The appellant submitted that, insure