Jammu and Kashmir High Court Decides to Hear All Pending Appeals From Former State Consumer Commission

Must Read

Parents of Road Accident Victim Entitled To Compensation: Delhi High Court

Justice JR Midha said, “Even if parents are not dependent on their children at the time of an accident, they will certainly be dependent, both financially and emotionally, upon them at the later stage of their life, as the children were dependent upon their parents in their initial years.”

Plea Challenging the AIBE Rules Framed by BCI Filed in the Supreme Court

A Writ Petition was presently filed in the Supreme Court by a newly enrolled lawyer challenging the All India Bar Examination Rules 2010 which have been framed by the Bar Council of India which mandates that an advocate has to qualify for the All India Bar Examination (AIBE) to practice law after enrollment.

Bombay High Court: Mere Presence at the Crime Scene Not Enough for Punishment

The Bombay High Court ruled that it cannot be considered a crime if a person is merely present at the crime scene which falls under the Maharashtra Prohibition of Obscene Dance in Hotels and Restaurants and Bar Rooms and Protection of Dignity of Women Act 2016. It also quashed two First Information Reports (FIR) against two individuals who were arrested in a raid at a dance bar by the Santacruz Police, in 2017.

CAIT Files a Plea Against WhatsApp’s New Privacy Policy in the Supreme Court

Confederation of All India Traders (CAIT) has filed a petition against WhatsApp’s new privacy rules in the Supreme Court. The petition says that WhatsApp which is known to render public services by providing a platform to communicate has recently imposed a privacy policy that is unconstitutional, which not only goes against the fundamental rights of citizens but also jeopardizes the national security of our country.

RTI Activist Files a Plea in Bombay High Court Against Bharat Biotech’s Covaxin

On Saturday, a plea has been filed before the Bombay High Court by an activist stating that Bharat Biotech Covaxin had not been granted full approval but a restricted use in clinical trials according to the Drugs Comptroller General of India. The Company's phase 3 trials are ongoing and the DGCI has not made any data available in the public domain for peer- review by independent scientists.

WhatsApp Emails Delhi HC Judge Asking Her Not To Hear the Plea Challenging New Privacy Policy

The Delhi High Court raised strong objection to an E-mail sent by WhatsApp asking a judge not to hear the plea which challenges its new privacy policy. Justice Pratibha Singh said that the e-mail that was withdrawn later was totally unwarranted as she was anyway going to recuse from hearing the plea which was filed by Rohilla Chaitanya who contends that the new privacy policy of WhatsApp provides 360-degree access to a customer’s virtual activity and is against the fundamental right of privacy.

Follow us

On 22nd June 2020, the Bench of Justices Ali Mohammad Magrey and Vinod Chatterji Koul heard the following three appeals, via video conferencing –

  • Sajad Ahmad Malik vs. Divisional Manager, National Insurance Company Ltd. & Anr.
  • Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. vs Sajad Ahmad Malik & Anr. 
  • Divisional Manager, National Insurance Company Ltd. vs Sajad Ahmad Malik & Anr. 

The Court heard the appeals together as they arose out of an order passed by erstwhile J&K State Consumer Commission.

Facts of the case

Sajad Ahmad, the complainant insured his residential building with both National Insurance Company Ltd and the Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. On 23-09-2002, the complainant claimed that some terrorists sneaked into his house. The terrorists and the security personnel had a gun battle lasting for two days. On 24-09-2002, the insured building blasted, killing two terrorists.

The complainant approached both the Insurance Companies to depute Surveyors on the spot. The National Insurance Company deputed a surveyor on the spot. On the other hand, the Oriental Insurance Company did not. Both the insurance companies failed to settle the complainant’s claim. Thus, the complainant approached the then J&K State Consumer Commission. The Commission directed the National Insurance Company Ltd to pay ₹7,00,000 and Oriental Insurance Company Ltd to pay ₹8,00,000. This Payment had to be made within 6 weeks. The complainant filed an appeal as he claimed ₹38,00,000 with 15% interest. Both the insurance companies filed separate appeals that sought to set aside the Commission’s order dated 31-05-2013. 

Arguments by the parties

The learned counsels for all the three parties raised the issue of jurisdiction of this Court. Jammu and Kashmir Reorganization Act, 2019 came into effect on 31st October 2019. The Government of India made the Central laws applicable in the UTs of J&K and Ladakh. Hence, J&K Consumer Protection Act, 1987 stood repealed. Thus, this Court does not have the jurisdiction to hear appeals against the Commission’s orders. Thus, the parties questioned the maintainability of these appeals in this Court.

The learned counsel for the complainant contended that he is entitled to a higher amount of compensation. The learned counsel for National Insurance Company argued that the complainant had prior knowledge about the presence of two terrorists in his house. It is for this reason, he insured his house with two companies. The Police Investigation Report confirmed the same. The complainant concealed the material facts like the presence of two terrorists.

Thus, the complainant obtained the insurance policies fraudulently. The presence of terrorists makes it clear that the house will be attacked by forces anytime. The learned counsel for Oriental Insurance Company argued that the insurance contract must be based on ‘utmost good faith’. In this case, the complainant concealed the necessary information. Thus, he intentionally committed fraud upon the Company. Hence, the insurance contract is void ab initio and not enforceable under law. Thus, the Company is not liable to pay compensation. 

Court’s Analysis

The complainant had failed to disclose the presence of terrorists in his house. The complainant did not inform about the simultaneous insurance policy for the same house. This makes the insurance contract void. The Court is of the view that the Commission is wrong with its impugned order. This is because the order is contrary to the evidence on record and the law governing the subject.

Court’s Decision

This Court decided to hear all the pending proceedings or appeals arising out of the orders of the then J&K State Consumer Commission. This Court will hear them as if the old Act was still in force. Thus, the question of jurisdiction stands answered. However, the Court made it clear that all new proceedings and appeals shall be dealt with according to the new law- the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. The changed law provided under J&K Reorganization Act, 2019 will be followed.

The Commission’s order dated 31-05-2013 is set aside. The Court allowed the appeals of both the insurance companies. It dismissed the complainant’s appeal along with his consumer complaint. 


Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgements from the court. Follow us on Google News, InstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe for our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

Parents of Road Accident Victim Entitled To Compensation: Delhi High Court

Justice JR Midha said, “Even if parents are not dependent on their children at the time of an accident, they will certainly be dependent, both financially and emotionally, upon them at the later stage of their life, as the children were dependent upon their parents in their initial years.”

Plea Challenging the AIBE Rules Framed by BCI Filed in the Supreme Court

A Writ Petition was presently filed in the Supreme Court by a newly enrolled lawyer challenging the All India Bar Examination Rules 2010 which have been framed by the Bar Council of India which mandates that an advocate has to qualify for the All India Bar Examination (AIBE) to practice law after enrollment.

Bombay High Court: Mere Presence at the Crime Scene Not Enough for Punishment

The Bombay High Court ruled that it cannot be considered a crime if a person is merely present at the crime scene which falls under the Maharashtra Prohibition of Obscene Dance in Hotels and Restaurants and Bar Rooms and Protection of Dignity of Women Act 2016. It also quashed two First Information Reports (FIR) against two individuals who were arrested in a raid at a dance bar by the Santacruz Police, in 2017.

CAIT Files a Plea Against WhatsApp’s New Privacy Policy in the Supreme Court

Confederation of All India Traders (CAIT) has filed a petition against WhatsApp’s new privacy rules in the Supreme Court. The petition says that WhatsApp which is known to render public services by providing a platform to communicate has recently imposed a privacy policy that is unconstitutional, which not only goes against the fundamental rights of citizens but also jeopardizes the national security of our country.

RTI Activist Files a Plea in Bombay High Court Against Bharat Biotech’s Covaxin

On Saturday, a plea has been filed before the Bombay High Court by an activist stating that Bharat Biotech Covaxin had not been granted full approval but a restricted use in clinical trials according to the Drugs Comptroller General of India. The Company's phase 3 trials are ongoing and the DGCI has not made any data available in the public domain for peer- review by independent scientists.

WhatsApp Emails Delhi HC Judge Asking Her Not To Hear the Plea Challenging New Privacy Policy

The Delhi High Court raised strong objection to an E-mail sent by WhatsApp asking a judge not to hear the plea which challenges its new privacy policy. Justice Pratibha Singh said that the e-mail that was withdrawn later was totally unwarranted as she was anyway going to recuse from hearing the plea which was filed by Rohilla Chaitanya who contends that the new privacy policy of WhatsApp provides 360-degree access to a customer’s virtual activity and is against the fundamental right of privacy.

TRP Scam Case: Bombay HC Extends Protection To Arnab Goswami and Other Employees Till the Next Hearing

On Friday, the Bombay High court extended the protection that was given, to Republic TV’s Editor in Chief Arnab Goswami and other employees of ARG Outlier Media Private Limited till January 29th in the alleged case of Television Rating Point manipulation. A status report was submitted by the police to the division bench of Justices S.S.Shinde and Manish Pitale by the Police on the ongoing case.

Plea Seeks FIR Against Maharashtra Minister Dhananjay Munde in Bombay HC for False Info

A plea has been filed in Bombay High Court seeking an FIR against Maharashtra minister Dhananjay Munde who is undergoing times of trouble due to his extra-marital affair. Recently, an FIR had been lodged against Munde by a woman, accusing him of raping her sister. Munde clarified that he was actually in a relationship with that woman and had two children. He accused the two women of blackmailing him.

Writ Petition for Compensation Accepted by Calcutta High Court 

Introduction The Petitioner Purna Ch. Biswas filed a Writ Petition with the complaint that their claims for a higher quantum of compensation have not yet...

No Members Could Be Disqualified Without Authorisation by Political Party: Gujarat High Court

Excerpt The dispute application no.7 of 2020 filed by respondent no.2 before designated authority. Thereafter the designated authority order dated 28.10.2020 disqualified the petitioner and...

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -