The Gauhati High Court declined to entertain a writ petition challenging an insurance claim repudiation and an Ombudsman's judgment. The Court held that disputed questions of fact require a trial forum instead of Article 226 jurisdiction.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010014232015
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/3017/2015
MRS. BAKUL ROY
W/O LT. NITINDRA NATH ROY, R/O SANKAR MISSION ROAD, OLD POST OFFICE GALI, NAGAON TOWN, P.O. NAGAON, P.S. and DIST- NAGAON, ASSAM, PIN-782001
VERSUS
THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. and 4 ORS REGD. AND HEAD OFFICE REP. BY THE CHAIRMAN CUM MANAGING DIRECTOR, NEW INDIA ASSURANCE BUILDING, 87, MAHATMA GANDHI ROAD, FORT MUMBAI-01
2:THE REGIONAL MANAGER NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. NORTH EASTERN REGIONAL OFFICE G.S. ROAD BHANGAGARH GHY-5 ASSAM
3:THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. OPP. TO NAME CARE HOSPITAL G.S. ROAD BHANGAGARH GHY-5 ASSAM
4:THE BRANCH MANAGER NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. JOGANNATH MANDIR ROAD NAGAON TOWN
Page No.# 2/3
NAGAON ASSAM PIN-782001 5:THE INSURANCE OMBUDSMAN REP. BY THE SECY. FOR THE STATE OF ASSAM MEGHALAYA MANIPUR MIZORAM ARUNACHAL PRADESH NAGALAND AND TRIPURA C/O JEEVAN NIVESH 5TH FLOOR NEAR PANBAZAR OVER BRIDGE S.S.ROAD GHY-1 ASSA
For the petitioner (s) : Mr. A. K. Purkayastha, Advocate
For the respondent (s) : Mr. S. Dutta, Senior Advocate Mr. C. Sarma, Advocate
BEFORE
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH
03.01.2024
The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner being aggrieved on the repudiation of the insurance claim by the respondent Insurance Company as well as the judgment and order dated 10.09.2013 passed by the learned Insurance Ombudsman in Complaint Case No.11G1-076/12-13 and also seeking a direction upon the respondent Insurance Company to pay the said claimed amount to the petitioner.
Page No.# 3/3
cannot be adjudicated under Article 226 of the Constitution taking into account that various disputed questions of facts have to be adjudicated upon. The petitioner, therefore, would be well advised to approach the appropriate forum wherein the factual aspects can be determined.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to entertain the writ petition regarding repudiation of an insurance claim when disputed questions of fact remain unresolved.
MRS. BAKUL ROY
THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. and 4 ORS
DEVASHIS BARUAH
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
