Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 67 (0.83 seconds)
Documents citing Champalal Verma vs Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. on 28 March, 2008

M/S Achal Paler Industries vs Icici Lombard General Insurance ... on 6 July, 2015

The report of the surveyor carries weightage and is a valuable piece of evidence. The report of surveyor can be discarded only on the proof of strong circumstances to the contrary on the record. We also do not find any force in the argument of counsel for the complainant that no spot inspection was Consumer Complaint No.15 of 2009 27 done by the surveyor in this regard. The report of the surveyor is a valuable piece of evidence in our view and it has also been so observed by the National Commission in case "Champalal Verma Vs. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd." 2008(III) CPJ-93(NC).
State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Cites 12 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

M/S Malu Bardana Having Rented Godown vs D.M. National Insurance Co.Ltd & Anr. on 2 January, 2018

The OPs appointed Hitesh Kumar Chitalia as Preliminary Surveyor, who did not determine the loss of bags, therefore, Cunninghum Lindsey International Insurance Surveyors and Loss Assessors was appointed as Surveyor, who gave his report. On the basis of Surveyor's Report, the complainant was intimated that he is only entitled for Rs.4,14,224/-, but the complainant himself did not give his consent for the same, therefore, the OPs did not commit any deficiency in service. The complaint is liable to be dismissed. He place reliance on Shri Ganesh Spinners Vs. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. III (1996) CPJ 183 (NC); Baij Nath Vs. Lucknow Development Authority, II (2010) CPJ 1 (NC); Haryana Urban Development Authority Vs. Bhisham Kumar, II (2010) CPJ 237 (NC); Bhagirathi Godawari Aqua Pure Pvt. Ltd. Vs. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. I (2017) CPJ 187 (NC); National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Arvind Kumar Ojha, III (2016) CPJ 643 (NC); Rahul Furniture House Vs. New India Assurance Company Limited, II (2016) CPJ 589 (NC); and Champalal Verma Vs. Oriental Insurance Company Limited, III (2008) CPJ 93 (NC).
State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Cites 22 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Bhiwadi Polymers Ltd. vs The New India Assu. Co. Ltd. on 15 December, 2025

8. So far as, the case of the complainant is that it had supplied all the relevant documents along with the claim. We have specifically asked counsel of the complainant to point out any documents filed by him that the GR of the goods were supplied to the O.P. There is a letter of O.P exhibit Ex.CW- 1/13 in which it has specifically demanded GR or the gate pass to determine as to when the vehicle entered the premises, and the material was lying in the tanker. In response to this letter complainant had written a letter exhibit Ex.CW-1/14 in which it is stated that the company was a small and did not make entry gate pass of any material in the factory. It has been specifically stated that only through invoice and GR of the supplier entry of the material was taken. It does not say that the GR had already been supplied to the O.P. It is, therefore, clear that complainant failed to supply the GR. In the absence of GR the amount of Rs.7,94,000/- has been deducted by the O.P. So far as, jurisdiction of this forum to quantify the loss is concerned. Counsel for the O.P has relied upon an authority reported as Champalal Verma Vs Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. III (2008) CPJ 93 (NC) in this authority it has been held that the consumer fora cannot go into quantum dispute. In view of this authority, we are of the view that since the complainant has not supplied necessary documents to support his claim, hence the O.P deducted the amount of Rs.7,94,000/-. In the absence of such documents neither it is feasible nor this forum is a competent to go into the expect regarding quantification of the loss suffered by the complainant.
State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Cites 14 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

M/S Centex Fabrics - Export Unit & Anr., vs M/S National Insurance Company Limited ... on 13 April, 2023

It is submitted that a Surveyor was appointed as required by law and his report has been gone by. Reliance is placed on this Commission's order in Champala Verma Vs. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., III (2008) CPJ 93 that held that the report of a surveyor has to be given due weightage and the Consumer Fora cannot go into the question of quantum as it involves detailed investigation not possible in summary proceedings. On merits, it is submitted that the complainant failed to provide the costing for manufacturing of all types of damaged material despite opportunity. It also failed to segregate affected stocks for nearly 6 months which delayed assessment of salvage value and minimization of loss. It is contended that salvage value of Rs 51 lakhs was accepted by the complainant. The complainant is alleged to have adopted a rate in the claim as on the date of loss which was higher than the average rate/considered rate for valuation in the stock valuation. Deduction of salvage value of Rs 48,13,482/- and excess @ 5% from the assessed loss is also justified by the opposite party. It is also stated that the loss in terms of pieces was 2,25,000 and not 2,53,222 as claimed by the complainant and accordingly the claim was revised. The complaint is therefore, recommended to be disallowed.
National Consumer Disputes Redressal Cites 13 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Shekh Rabbani Mohammadi vs S.B.I. General Life Insurance Through ... on 31 October, 2018

4. Learned concerned District Forum held that as settled in 2008 (3) C.P.J.93 (N.C.) Champalal Verma Vs. Oriental Insurance Company Limited (National Commission), the District Forum, has to give weightage to the Surveyor's Report and does not indulge for quantum dispute. The party may go to the Civil Court for the quantum dispute and as in the present matter the complainant in the light of Surveyor's Report, has accepted the said amount as full and final settlement, hence it cannot be said that there was any deficiency in service on the part of the O.P. With this, the District Forum, dismissed the complaint.
State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Cites 1 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 Next