Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Court: himachal pradesh Year: 2014 Page 1 of about 4 results (0.034 seconds)

Jan 10 2014 (HC)

New India Assurance Company Ltd. Vs. Mrs. Ritu Upadhaya and Others

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Decided on : Jan-10-2014

mansoor ahmad mir, acj 1. appellant/insurer has questioned the award dated 14.1.2011, passed by the motor accident claims tribunal, fast track court, chamba, district chamba (hp) in claim petition no. 20 of 2009 titled smt. ritu upadhaya and others versus new india assurance co. ltd. and others by the medium of this appeal, for short impugned award?. brief facts: 2. rakesh kumar upadhyay deceased, who was an employee of the national hydro electric power corporation ltd./respondent no. 5 herein died in a vehicular accident which has been caused by the driver of the vehicle no. pb06g-4190, while driving the offending vehicle rashly and negligently, on 3rd march, 2009 at about 3.30 p.m. at kangora morh, chaned tehsil and district chamba, hp. the deceased was a chartered accountant being assistant manager (finance) in national hydro electric power corporation ltd./respondent no. 5 and was drawing salary to the tune of `37,746/- per month. 3. respondents no. 1 to 3 filed the claim petition before the learned tribunal below for grant of compensation on the ground that they and mother of the deceased have lost bread earner who was 36 years of age at the time of accident, drawing an amount of ` 37,746/- per month, as salary and have prayed for the grant of compensation to the tune of ` 75 lacs, as per breakups given in the claim petition. 4. the insurer-appellant and owner of the vehicle, i.e., respondent no. 2 filed the objections and contested the petition on various grounds. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 21 2014 (TRI)

Mithun Chauhan Vs. the New India Assurance Company Limited

Court : Himachal Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Shimla

Decided on : Apr-21-2014

justice (retd.) surjit singh, president (oral) 1. this is a complainants appeal against the order dated 08.11.2013, of learned district consumer disputes redressal forum, shimla, whereby his complaint, under section 12 of the consumer protection act, 1986, which he filed against the respondent, has been dismissed, with the finding that the person, who was driving the insured vehicle, at the time, when accident took place, resulting in damage to the insured vehicle, did not possess a valid and effective driving licence, inasmuch as there was no endorsement on the licence for driving a transport vehicle. 2. appellant owned a truck (heavy goods vehicle), which was insured with the respondent in the sum of rs.4,15,000/- for the period from 07.08.2009 to 06.08.2010. on 11.04.2010, vehicle met with an accident and was completely damaged. intimation of accident was given to the respondent. a surveyor was deputed, who though reported that this was a case of total loss and assessed the salvage value at rs.1,25,000/-, yet the respondent repudiated the claim on the ground that harish sharma, who was driving the truck, at the relevant time, did not possess a licence to drive a transport vehicle and there were three passengers, on board the truck, in addition to the driver, when the accident had taken place and those persons were gratuitous passenger. 3. appellant felt aggrieved by the repudiation of his claim and filed a complaint, under section 12 of the consumer protection act, 1986. .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 19 2014 (TRI)

United India Insurance Company, Through Its Senior Divisional Manager ...

Court : Himachal Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Shimla

Decided on : May-19-2014

justice (retd.) surjit singh, president (oral): 1. this is an appeal, under section 15 of the consumer protection act, 1986, against the order dated 21.12.2013, of learned district consumer disputes redressal forum, mandi, whereby a complaint, under section 12 of the consumer protection act, 1986, filed by the respondent, against the appellant, has been allowed and a direction given to it (the appellant), to pay a sum of rs.61,329/-, on account of insurance claim, with interest at the rate of 9% per annum and also to pay rs.5,000/-, as compensation and rs.3,000/-, as costs. 2. respondent owned a vehicle, which was insured with the appellant from 05.10.2011 to 04.10.2012. on 01.05.2012, the vehicle met with an accident and was damaged. according to the respondent, she spent rs.78,988/- on repair of the vehicle and another sum of rs.10,000/-, on towing the vehicle from the site of the accident to the workshop. 3. claim was lodged by the respondent with the appellant, but the same was repudiated on the grounds, that the person, who was driving the vehicle, possessed a licence to drive, only a light transport vehicle and that too a cab, while the vehicle, in question, was a medium goods carrier and the vehicle at the time of the accident was being driven, without a route permit, which meant breach of conditions of the policy that the vehicle was to be driven by a duly licensed person and it was not to be used in violation of section 66 of the motor vehicles act, 1988. 4. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 30 2014 (TRI)

Madan Sharma Vs. H.P. State Cooperative Bank Limited

Court : Himachal Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Shimla

Decided on : Apr-30-2014

justice (retd.) surjit singh, president (oral) 1. appellant is aggrieved by the order dated 16.07.2013, of learned district consumer disputes redressal forum, shimla, whereby his complaint, under section 12 of the consumer protection act, 1986, which he filed against the respondent, has been dismissed. 2. admitted facts are that the appellant wanted to set up a printing press in middle bazar, shimla. he prepared a project report and submitted the same to the respondent bank, with the request for sanctioning a loan of rs.14.00 lacs. he was sanctioned a loan of rs.8.00 lacs for setting up the printing press and was also allowed working capital limit of rs.2.00 lacs. loan amount of rs.8.00 lacs sanctioned for setting up the press was released in favour of the appellant on 19.04.2008. after the aforesaid amount of money was released in favour of the appellant, he addressed a letter dated 14.05.2008, copy annexure-3, informing the respondent that he had set up the printing press at sanjauli, instead of middle bazar, shimla. the respondent, through another letter dated 22.05.2008, copy annexure-4, was requested to visit the press at sanjauli. appellant also requested the respondent to release the amount of cc limit, so that he was not put to any financial hardship. 3. respondent addressed a letter dated 18.09.2008, copy annexure a-5, to the appellant, informing that he had not paid the monthly instalments of interest due for the moratorium period, which was required to be paid .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //