Maharashtra

StateCommission

A/02/403

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. - Complainant(s)

Versus

Sau. Mandakini Vinayakrao Jadhav - Opp.Party(s)

Mr. M. S. Pandit / Mrs. Shobha M. Pandit

22 Feb 2012

ORDER

BEFORE THE HON'BLE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL
COMMISSION, MAHARASHTRA, MUMBAI
 
First Appeal No. A/02/403
(Arisen out of Order Dated 25/01/2002 in Case No. CC/01/616 of District Kolhapur)
 
1. The New India Assurance Co. Ltd.
Branch Manager, Jaduban, Shahupuri, Kolhapur Through Regional Office, Sharda Centre, Behind Nal Stop, Karve Road, Pune 411 004.
Pune
Maharashtra
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. Sau. Mandakini Vinayakrao Jadhav
R/o. Rajarampuri, 4th Lane, 'E' Ward, Dist. Kolhapur
Kolhapur
Maharashtra
...........Respondent(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 Hon'ble Mr. S.R. Khanzode PRESIDING MEMBER
 Hon'ble Mr. Narendra Kawde MEMBER
 
PRESENT:None present for the appellant.
 Mr.Umesh Mangave, Advocate for the respondent.
ORDER

Per Shri S.R. Khanzode, Hon’ble Presiding Judicial Member

This appeal takes an exception to an order dated 25/01/2002 passed in consumer complaint No.616/2001, Sou.Mandakini Vainayakrao Jadhav V/s. The New India Assurance Company Ltd.,  by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Kolhapur (‘the Forum’ in short).  It is a case of alleged deficiency in service on the part of Insurance Company for partly allowing the claim in respect of vehicle which was stolen.  The Insured Declared Value and the amount of insurance was `5 Lakhs while the Insurance Company offered to settle the claim at `3,75,000/-.  This being not acceptable to the respondent/org. complainant, he filed the consumer complaint and it was decreed in her favour directing the Insurance Company to pay `4,50,000/- along with interest @ 10% p.a.  The Forum had taken into consideration the depreciated value at 10% while awarding the claim.  It is submitted by the respondent that org. complainant did not file any appeal.  However, feeling aggrieved by the award, the Insurance Company preferred this appeal.

 

2.       At the time of hearing of the appeal, appellant preferred to remain absent.  We heard Mr.Umesh Mangave, Advocate for the respondent/org. complainant.  Perused the record.

 

3.       In the instant case, since the ‘Insured Declared Value’ when the policy was renewed after the lapse of one year, was taken as `5 Lakhs, obviously, after taking into consideration a depreciated value, to again work out  the value applying depreciation, as tried to be done by the Surveyor, is per se erroneous.  There is no justification shown for such deduction and therefore, action of the Insurance Company can be termed as arbitrary and amounting to unconscionable conduct.  Under the circumstance, deficiency in service on the part of the Insurance Company is well established.  For this reason, we do not want to take a different view than what has been taken by the forum.  Thus, being the appeal is devoid of any substance, we pass the following order :-

                             -: ORDER :-

1.                 Appeal stands dismissed.

2.                 In the given circumstance, both the parties to bear their own costs.

3.                 Copies of the order be furnished to the parties.

 

Pronounced

Dated 22nd February 2012.

 

 
 
[Hon'ble Mr. S.R. Khanzode]
PRESIDING MEMBER
 
[Hon'ble Mr. Narendra Kawde]
MEMBER

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.