Allowed

Anil D v. the Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.

Kerala HC5 Dec 2023WP(C)/15306/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the writ petition, setting aside an Insurance Ombudsman's award issued without hearing the petitioner. The court directed the Ombudsman to reconsider the complaint after hearing the petitioner and considering their written statement.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is allowed; Ext.P11 is set aside; consequential direction to the learned Ombudsman to reconsider the complaint after hearing the petitioner and adverting to Ext.P10.

Anil D Vs the Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. — Consumer Protection | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2023 / 14TH AGRAHAYANA, 1945
WP(C) NO. 15306 OF 2020

¶5

PETITIONER:

¶6

ANIL D.
S/O.DIVAKARAN,
AGED 37 YEARS
ALAMUTTAM, 35/1158B, CHAKKUNGAL ROAD,
PALARIVATTOM, PIN-682025.
BY ADVS.
SOJAN MICHEAL
SRI.V.S.BOBAN
SRI.CHACKO SIMON
SRI.ANTONY ROBERT DIAS

¶7

RESPONDENTS:

¶8

1THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD
ORIENTAL HOUSE, P B 7037, A-25/27, ASAF ALI ROAD,
NEW DELHI, PIN- 110002, REPRESENT BY ITS REGIONAL
MANAGER, THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LTD,
REGIONAL OFFICE, METRO PALACE, OPP. NORTH RAILWAY
STATION, ERNAKULAM, PIN- 682018.
2INSURANCE OMBUDSMAN,
KOCHI, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
OFFICE OF THE INSURANCE OMBUDSMAN, 2ND FLOOR,
PULINAT BUILDING, OPP.COCHIN SHIPYARD, M.G ROAD,
KOCHI- 682015.
BY ADV GEORGE A.CHERIAN

¶9

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
05.12.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶10

WP(C) NO. 15306 OF 2020 2

¶11

JUDGMENT

¶12

The petitioner impugns Ext.P11 order on various grounds, but

¶13

primarily that it was issued without hearing him and without considering Ext.P10 written statement filed by him.

¶14

The learned Standing Counsel for the 1^st respondent – Insurance Company, however, submitted that the learned Ombudsman could have done nothing more than to have issued Ext.P11 because, the petitioner did not appear before it for hearing. He, however, added that if this Court is so inclined, his client would not stand in the way of the learned Ombudsman being directed to reconsider the matter, adverting to Ext.P10 and after hearing the petitioner. He, however, prayed that no affirmative declarations be made in favour of the petitioner in this writ petition.

¶15

I do not propose to enter into the merits of Ext.P11 in any manner because, as correctly pointed out by the parties, it has been issued without hearing the petitioner; though, I cannot blame it because, he had failed to appear before it. However, Ext.P10 written statement is stated to have been filed earlier; and obviously, the learned Ombudsman ought to have considered the same, before a final order could have been issued.

¶16

In the afore circumstances, I allow this writ petition and set aside

¶17

WP(C) NO. 15306 OF 2020 3

¶18

Ext.P11; with a consequential direction to the learned Ombudsman to reconsider the complaint of the petitioner, after affording him an opportunity of being heard and adverting to Ext.P10 written statement; thus culminating in an appropriate fresh order, as expeditiously as is possible.

¶19

For expeditious compliance of the afore directions, I direct the parties to mark appearance before the learned Ombudsman at 11.00 a.m. on 20.12.2023.

¶20

Needless to say, all rival contentions of the parties are left open to be decided by the learned Ombudsman in due course.

¶21

Sd/-

¶22

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶23

JUDGE

¶24

MC/5.12

¶25

WP(C) NO. 15306 OF 2020 4

¶26

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 15306/2020

¶27

PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 02.02.2015 OF
THE INSURANCE OMBUDSMAN.
EXHIBIT P2TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 09.01.2017.
EXHIBIT P3TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED
15.02.2017.
EXHIBIT P4TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER IN WA NO.
2683/2017 DATED 04.01.2018.
EXHIBIT P5TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WA
NO.2683/2017 DATED 14.03.2018.
EXHIBIT P6TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE PERMANENT LOK
ADALAT IN OP NO.188/2018 DATED 08.10.2018.
EXHIBIT P7TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED NIL
AGAINST THE NON RENEWAL OF THE POLICY.
EXHIBIT P8TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED NIL
AGAINST THE REPUDIATION OF CLAIM.
EXHIBIT P9TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 08.07.2019
ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P10TRUE COY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT DATED
24.07.2019.
EXHIBIT P11TRUE COPY OF THE AWARD WITH COVERING LETTER
DATED 11.10.2019 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

Anil D v. the Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anil D v. the Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Radhakrishnan Nair T.P. Vs State Bank of India

Shajahan Vs Union of India

Gopika Jaya Prasad Vs State of Kerala

V.C. Anil Kumar, Vs State of Kerala

Ashraf M. a. Vs Banking Ombudsman

Universal Tele Service, Represented by Its Proprietor, Rajesh Babu Vs the Chief General Manager (Telecom)