Twitter
Advertisement

Reliance risk firm to pay Rs 6.3 lakh for rejecting claim

Latest News
article-main
FacebookTwitterWhatsappLinkedin

The Suburban Mumbai district's additional consumer dispute redressal forum recently penalised Reliance General Insurance Company (RGIC) for wrongly rejecting an insurance claim of a Navi Mumbai resident. The forum held the firm had caused deficiency of service towards the complainant.

What's the forum's order?
The forum asked the insurance firm to reimburse the claim of Rs6,31,800 to complainant Nanasaheb Pawar along with 10% interest rate from October 2011. The forum also directed the firm to pay Rs5,000 towards the complainant's litigation cost.

What was the policy for?
Pawar he had bought a Chevrolet Tavera after taking a bank loan. The Navi Mumbai purchased a policy for the car from RGIC. The policy was active from June 13, 2009 to June 12, 2010, for which Pawar had paid a premium of Rs15,648.

Why did Pawar claim insurance?
Pawar, in his complaint, said that the vehicle was stolen between between April 3, 2009 and September 4, 2009. He approached the Kalamboli police station and filed a complaint. Though the police investigated the theft, they failed to trace the vehicle. The cops then approached the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Panvel on July 23, 2010 and filed a report. Pawar on August 9, 2010, filed a claim with RGIC.

Why was the claim rejected?
The insurance firm did not pass Pawar's claim on the grounds that he was using the vehicle for commercial purposes, which, it said was a violation of the conditions mentioned in the policy. Aggrieved, Pawar approached the consumer forum in October 2011, following which the forum asked RGIC to file its reply.

What was risk firm's argument?
RGIC reiterated its stand of the Tavera being used for works other than personal use. It claimed that it did not fail in providing services to its consumers. The firm further alleged that Pawar was extracting money from it.

What was the final order?
After going through a few judgments passed in similar cases, as well as the arguments advanced by both parties, the forum held, "We have no hesitation to conclude that the act of the insurance firm amounts to deficiency of service. Therefore, the complainant is entitled to get Rs6,31,800 with interest."

Find your daily dose of news & explainers in your WhatsApp. Stay updated, Stay informed-  Follow DNA on WhatsApp.
Advertisement

Live tv

Advertisement
Advertisement