National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Allows Appeal in Insurance Claim Case — State Commission Failed to Consider Compensation Amount. Compensation of Rs. 3,000 per day from 15.06.2021 till payment was not considered by State Commission in Appeal No. 129 of 2023.

Tribunals: National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission In Favour of Accused
  • 23
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The case involves an appeal by Manoj Kumar against TATA AIG General Insurance Company Ltd. and three others. The dispute arose from a complaint filed before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Begusarai, Bihar in Complaint Case No. 14 of 2022. The District Commission passed an order on 19.04.2023, awarding compensation of Rs. 3,000 per day from 15.06.2021 till payment. The respondents appealed to the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bihar, Patna in Appeal No. 129 of 2023. The State Commission modified the District Commission's order but failed to consider the compensation amount. The appellant then approached the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission. The National Commission framed two questions of law: whether the State Commission rightly passed the impugned order and whether the order was illegal for not considering the compensation amount. The National Commission found that the State Commission had not considered the compensation amount of Rs. 3,000 per day from 15.06.2021 till its payment as ordered by the District Commission. Consequently, the National Commission allowed the appeal, set aside the State Commission's order, and remanded the matter back to the State Commission for fresh consideration of the compensation amount.

Headnote

A) Consumer Law - Insurance Claim - Compensation - The State Commission failed to consider the compensation amount of Rs. 3,000 per day from 15.06.2021 till payment as ordered by the District Commission - The National Commission held that the State Commission's order was illegal for not considering the compensation amount - The matter was remanded back to the State Commission for fresh consideration (Paras 1-2).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the Hon'ble State Commission Bihar, Patna has rightly passed the impugned order and modified the order 19.04.2023, passed by the Ld. District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Begusarai, Bihar in Complaint Case No. 14 of 2022 vide impugned order? Whether the impugned order passed by the Hon'ble State Commission Bihar, Patna in Appeal No. 129 of 2023 is illegal, if the Hon'ble State Commission has not considered the order of the compensation amount @ Rs. 3,000/- per day from 15.06.2021 till its payment passed by the Ld. District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission?

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The National Commission allowed the appeal, set aside the impugned order of the State Commission, and remanded the matter back to the State Commission for fresh consideration of the compensation amount.

Law Points

  • Consumer Protection Act
  • 2019
  • Insurance claim
  • Compensation
  • State Commission's failure to consider compensation amount
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2025 LawText (NCDRC) (01) 15

2025-06-18

Mr. Bipin Kumar, Advocate for the Appellant(s)

Manoj Kumar

TATA AIG General Insurance Company Ltd. & 3 Ors.

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Appeal against order of State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission modifying District Commission's order in an insurance claim case.

Remedy Sought

Appellant sought setting aside of State Commission's order and restoration of District Commission's order awarding compensation of Rs. 3,000 per day.

Filing Reason

State Commission failed to consider the compensation amount of Rs. 3,000 per day from 15.06.2021 till payment as ordered by the District Commission.

Previous Decisions

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Begusarai, Bihar passed order on 19.04.2023 in Complaint Case No. 14 of 2022 awarding compensation of Rs. 3,000 per day from 15.06.2021 till payment. State Commission modified that order in Appeal No. 129 of 2023 without considering the compensation amount.

Issues

Whether the State Commission rightly passed the impugned order modifying the District Commission's order? Whether the State Commission's order is illegal for not considering the compensation amount of Rs. 3,000 per day from 15.06.2021 till payment?

Submissions/Arguments

Appellant argued that the State Commission failed to consider the compensation amount ordered by the District Commission.

Ratio Decidendi

The State Commission's order was illegal as it did not consider the compensation amount of Rs. 3,000 per day from 15.06.2021 till payment as ordered by the District Commission. The matter requires fresh consideration by the State Commission.

Judgment Excerpts

Whether the impugned order passed by the Hon'ble State Commission Bihar, Patna in Appeal No. 129 of 2023 is illegal, if the Hon'ble State Commission has not considered the order of the compensation amount @ Rs. 3,000/- per day from 15.06.2021 till its payment passed by the Ld. District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission?

Procedural History

Complaint Case No. 14 of 2022 was filed before District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Begusarai, Bihar which passed order on 19.04.2023. Appeal No. 129 of 2023 was filed before State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bihar, Patna which modified the order. The appellant then approached the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission.

Acts & Sections

  • Consumer Protection Act, 2019:
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Tribunals National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Allows Appeal in Insurance Claim Case — State Commission Failed to Consider Compensation Amount. Compensation of Rs. 3,000 per day from 15.06.2021 till payment was not considered by State Commission i...
Related Judgement
High Court Court Rules in Favor of Petitioner, Overturns Minister's Decision on Ashram School Management . Legal jurisdiction and procedural adherence scrutinized in Writ Petition, emphasizing the roles of Minister and Secretary in school management decisions.