NCDRC

NCDRC

RP/1153/2010

NAGENDRA KUMAR SINHA - Complainant(s)

Versus

ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. - Opp.Party(s)

MR. R.K. BHAWNANI

28 Jun 2010

ORDER


NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSIONNEW DELHIREVISION PETITION NO. 1153 OF 2010
(Against the Order dated 31/12/2009 in Appeal No. 318/2009 of the State Commission Chhattisgarh)
1. NAGENDRA KUMAR SINHAR/o. Village - Manki, P.O. Somni, Tah. & Dist. RajnandgaonRajnandgaon(Chhattisgarh) ...........Petitioner(s)
Versus
1. ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.Through: Manager, The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., Branch Office No. 2, Madina Manzil, Kutchery Chowk, Jail RoadRaipur(Chhattisgarh) ...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K. BATTA ,PRESIDING MEMBERHON'BLE MRS. VINEETA RAI ,MEMBER
For the Petitioner :MR. R.K. BHAWNANI
For the Respondent :NEMO

Dated : 28 Jun 2010
ORDER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.

Heard the Counsel for the petitioner. The case of the petitioner is fully covered by the two judgments of this Commission in United India Insurance Co. Ltd., vs Maya – II (2008) CPJ 182 (NC) and Devendra Singh vs New India Assurance Co. Ltd., and Ors. – 1986 – 2005 Consumer 8542 (NS). The fora below have taken into consideration all the relevant facts and found that it was the complainant who was negligent in not taking proper safeguard against the theft of the vehicle, which facilitated the incident of theft. Accordingly, we do not find any reason to interfere with the concurrent findings of the two fora below in the exercise of revisional jurisdiction under Section 21 (b) of the C P Act, 1986, as we do not find any illegality, material irregularity or jurisdictional error in the orders fora below. Accordingly, the revision petition is dismissed, with no order as to cost.



......................JR.K. BATTAPRESIDING MEMBER
......................VINEETA RAIMEMBER