Judicial Review Is Not A Substitute For Examiner’s Judgment: Delhi High Court Rejects DJSE Candidate’s Plea Over Alteration of Marks Part-Payments Extend Limitation - Each Payment Revives Limitation: Delhi High Court Non-Stamping Renders A Document Inadmissible, Not Void – Defect Is Curable Once Duty Is Paid: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Specific Performance MP High Court Upholds Ladli Behna Yojana Criteria; Rules Registration Deadlines and Age Limits Fall Under Executive Domain Criminal Courts Are Not Recovery Agents: Orissa High Court Grants Bail in ₹3.5 Crore Land Fraud Cases Citing Article 21 and Terminal Illness 304 Part I IPC | Sudden Fight Between Brothers Over Mud House Construction: Jharkhand High Court Converts Murder Conviction To Culpable Homicide When Rape Fails, Section 450 Cannot Stand: Orissa High Court Acquits Accused of House-Trespass After Finding Relationship Consensual Concurrent Eviction Orders Will Not Be Reopened Under Article 227: Madras High Court Section 128 Contract Act | Surety’s Liability Is Co-Extensive: Kerala High Court Upholds Recovery from Guarantors’ Salary Custodial Interrogation Not Warranted When Offences Are Not Punishable With Death or Life: Karnataka High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail to Deputy Tahsildar in Land Records Case Order VIII Rules 3 & 5 CPC | Silence Is Admission: State’s Failure To Specifically Deny Hiring Amounts To Acceptance: JK HC Consumer | No Complete Deficiency In Service — Excess Rainfall Also To Blame: Supreme Court Halves Compensation In Groundnut Seed Crop Failure Case Development Cannot Override The Master Plan: Supreme Court Nullifies Cement Unit CLU In Agricultural Zone Negative Viscera Report Is Not a Passport to Acquittal: Madras High Court Confirms Life Term of Parents for Poisoning Mentally Retarded Daughter Observations Have Had a Demoralising and Chilling Effect: Allahabad High Court Judge Recuses from Bail Matter After Supreme Court’s Strong Remarks Controversial YouTube Remarks On ‘Black Magic Village’ Not A Crime: Gauhati High Court Quashes FIR Against Abhishek Kar “Failure To Specifically Deny Allegations Amounts To Admission”: J&K High Court Reiterates Law Under Order VIII CPC Section 293 Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Examination of Expert When DNA Report Is Disputed: MP High Court Medical Evidence Trumps False Alibi: Allahabad HC Upholds Conviction In Matrimonial Murder Where Strangulation Was Masked By Post-Mortem Burning Helping Young Advocates Is Not A Favour – It Is A Need For A Better Justice System: Rajasthan High Court Section 82 Cr.P.C. | Mere Non-Appearance Does Not Ipsi Facto Establish Absconding: Punjab & Haryana High Court Sets Aside Order Declaring Student Abroad as Proclaimed Person

Supreme Court Holds Insurance Company Liable for Deficiency in Service in Landmark Consumer Dispute Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


August 8, 2023 – In a significant ruling today, the Supreme Court of India, comprising Justices A.S. Bopanna and Dipankar Datta, held an insurance company liable for deficiency in service in a landmark consumer dispute case. The case revolved around the denial of an insurance claim by the insurance company for damages resulting from an ammonia gas leakage incident. The court's decision sheds light on the crucial role of technical evidence and the proper evaluation of expert opinions in insurance claim disputes.

The court's decision, while addressing the complexities of the case, highlighted the importance of evaluating surveyor and expert reports meticulously. The judgment referenced several past decisions of the court, emphasizing the necessity of a comprehensive approach to technical evidence in such cases.

Justice A.S. Bopanna, delivering the judgment, stated, "Absence of consideration of relevant factors is, therefore, writ large on the Surveyor's Report. The reports of the Loss Assessor and the Experts dwelled on general aspects of scientific observations... all relevant factors were not considered in the proper perspective by the Surveyor, yet, such Surveyor's Report was relied on by the Respondent to defeat the claim of the Appellant."

The court found serious deficiencies in the surveyor's report, noting the lack of scientific investigation. Furthermore, it criticized the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) for not giving due credence to the expert reports presented by the appellant. The judgment highlighted the flaws in the NCDRC's approach, indicating that the commission should have either accepted or rejected the reports in full, instead of cherry-picking elements that supported its conclusions.

Supreme Court held that the repudiation of the insurance claim by the respondent insurance company amounted to deficiency in service. The court ordered the insurance company to provide a lump-sum settlement of Rs. 2,25,00,000 to the appellant. The settlement must be released within two months; otherwise, it will accrue interest at a rate of 10% per annum.

The verdict comes as a significant precedent in consumer disputes related to insurance claims, reaffirming the importance of thorough evaluation of technical evidence and expert opinions. The ruling is expected to influence future cases involving insurance claims and their adjudication.

Date of Decision: 8th August, 2023

S.S. Cold Storage India Pvt. Ltd.  vs National Insurance Company Limited 

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/08-Aug-2023_S.S.COLD-STORAGE_Vs_National_Insurance.pdf"]

Latest Legal News