Supreme Court Upholds NCDRC Verdict in Insurance Dispute, Directs Transfer of Amount to DRT for Recovery

Share:
Against bench 6a tender evidence juvenility universal FIR Constable conviction interest principle violating coparcenary teachers child election recovery judge service principle rosewood fir discharge disclosure cheque 37 jurisdiction time evidence additional evidence medical

In a recent decision, the Supreme Court of India upheld the judgment of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) in an insurance dispute case involving G.M., Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. & Ors. versus Ashok Kumar Roy (D) thr. Lrs. The case revolved around the validity of an insurance policy and the coverage of a fire accident under the said policy.

The dispute arose when the appellants challenged the NCDRC’s verdict that directed them to pay a substantial sum of Rs.50,05,899/- along with an interest rate of 9% per annum to the respondent. The NCDRC had found that the policy issued by the appellants covered the fire and peril that had occurred during the period from 31.03.2001 to 29.03.2002.

The appellants contended that the policy had been wrongly issued and that they had subsequently taken steps to cancel it. However, their claim lacked substantiating evidence, as they failed to produce the communication supporting the alleged cancellation. The Court observed, “The absence of evidence supporting the appellant’s claim is highlighted.” The Court further noted that the NCDRC’s conclusion was justified in considering the validity of the policy.

Addressing a separate issue, the lending bank filed an application for impleadment and sought direction for the recovery of dues. The recovery certificate issued by the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) under the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 was brought into the proceedings. The Court directed the transfer of the available deposit to DRT, Guwahati, for accounting in the recovery proceedings. Both the bank and the respondent were provided an opportunity to consider the due amount and submit their arguments before the recovery officer.

The Supreme Court’s decision dismissed the appeal and ordered the transfer of the deposit amount to DRT, emphasizing that the recovery officer should consider the due amount and pass appropriate orders in accordance with the law. The Court’s decision upheld the NCDRC’s judgment and reiterated the importance of producing substantial evidence in support of claims.

Date of Decision: 09th August, 2023 

G.M.,ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD . & ORS. vs ASHOK KUMAR ROY (D) THR.LRS.   

Download Judgment

Share: