Driver Negligence Leads to Reduced Insurance Payout in Truck Theft Case.
14 June 2024
Consumer Protection Act >> Consumer Rights | Insurance Claim/Money Rejected >> Insurance
Pratap Singh filed Revision Petitions Nos. 216 and 217 of 2022 with the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (National Commission) challenging an order by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Uttar Pradesh (State Commission).
The case involved a truck theft insurance claim. Singh's truck was stolen, and the insurance company (OP 1-3) rejected his claim alleging the driver's negligence in not properly securing the vehicle.
The District Forum ruled in favor of Singh, directing the insurance company to pay the insured declared value of the truck. However, the State Commission partly allowed the insurance company's appeal, reducing the claim amount by 25% due to the driver's negligence. The National Commission dismissed Singh's revision petitions. The Commission's limited revisional jurisdiction applies only in cases where the State Commission exercised its authority illegally or with significant irregularities. In this case, both the District Forum and the State Commission concurred on the factual findings. Additionally, the insurance company did not contest the State Commission's order, making it final for them.
The order highlights the restricted scope of revisional power under the Consumer Protection Act. The National Commission cannot simply revisit factual determinations made by lower courts unless there are legal errors or procedural irregularities. This case underscores the importance of following proper procedures when filing insurance claims and the limitations of revision petitions in consumer disputes.