NCDRC

NCDRC

RP/377/2010

GOLDEN TRUST FINANCIAL SERVICES - Complainant(s)

Versus

UMA KANT SAHAY & ORS. - Opp.Party(s)

M/S. PARAS KUHAD & ASSOCIATES

10 Feb 2010

ORDER

Date of Filing: 13 Jan 2010

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSIONNEW DELHIREVISION PETITION NO. No. RP/377/2010
(Against the Order dated 09/10/2009 in Appeal No. 213/2006 of the State Commission Jharkhand)
1. GOLDEN TRUST FINANCIAL SERVICESds155, Lenin SaraiKolkata - 700316 ...........Appellant(s)

Vs.
1. UMA KANT SAHAY & ORS.R/o. Salanpur Near Water Plant, P.O. & P.S. KatralDhanbad2. THE MANAGER NATIONAL INSRANCE COMPANY LTD.Division - 3, 1 Shakespear Sarai, 6th FloorKolkata - 7000713. DR. SHEKHAR KUMAR, MEDICAL SUPERVISORFamily Welfare Centre, Zila ParishadDanbad ...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK BHAN ,PRESIDENTHON'BLE MR. B.K. TAIMNI ,MEMBER
For the Appellant :NEMO
For the Respondent :NEMO

Dated : 10 Feb 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.

          Petitioner was the opposite party No.2 before the District Forum.

          Son of the complainant/respondent had an effective Janata Personal Accident Policy when he died on 26.6.2002.  The son had met with an accident on 20.6.2002 while coming in a trecker which was struck by another vehicle on the G. T. Road.  He was treated by Dr. Shekhar Kumar at Dhanbad from 22.6.2002 for severe pain in neck and head.  However, he succumbed to his injuries on 26.6.2002 due to brain hemorrhage.  Insurance Company as well as the petitioner repudiated the claim of the respondent/complainant on the ground that the death of the complainant’s son was natural and the policy was for accidental death only.  Being aggrieved, respondent/complainant filed a complaint before the District Forum.

          District Forum dismissed the complaint, aggrieved against which the respondent filed an appeal before the State Commission which has been allowed by the impugned order.  The State Commission has directed to pay the insured amount with interest               @ 6% p.a. till realization to the complainant holding the insurance company and the petitioner jointly and severely responsible. 

Before the District Forum, insurance company filed its Written Statement and affidavit but the petitioner filed the Written Statement but without any affidavit in support of that.  The petitioner was given another opportunity to file the affidavit in support of the Written Statement which he failed to do.  Petitioner was not present while the case was heard by the District Forum.  The State Commission drawing an adverse inference against the petitioner, held the petitioner jointly and severely liable because the petitioner had not filed the affidavit in support of the averments made in the Written Statement.

 

-3-

          We agree with the view taken by the State Commission.  Since the petitioner filed the affidavit in support of the Written Statement to rebut the allegations of the respondent/complainant, the petitioner would be equally responsible along with the insurance company to pay the compensation.  Revision petition is dismissed.  No costs. 

 



......................JASHOK BHANPRESIDENT
......................B.K. TAIMNIMEMBER