![]() Online edition of India's National Newspaper Wednesday, Oct 31, 2007 ePaper |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Other States |
|
News:
ePaper |
Front Page |
National |
Tamil Nadu |
Andhra Pradesh |
Karnataka |
Kerala |
New Delhi |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Engagements |
Advts: Retail Plus | Classifieds | Jobs |
Other States
-
Orissa
CUTTACK: The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has fined the M/s Allianz Bajaj Life Insurance Company for ‘unfair trade practices’ and asked the insurance company to pay a damage of Rs. 50,000 to the complainant -- M/s Epari Sadashiv & Sons, a registered jeweller firm. Commission chairman Justice R.K. Patra and its member Subash Mahatab in their judgment delivered last week asked the insurance company to refund all the premiums paid by the complainant with an interest of 9 per cent per annum from the date of payment. The commission has asked the company to pay the damage by November 30, failing which an interest of 12 per cent will be imposed. Case costAllowing the complaint for cost, the insurance company has been also asked to pay another Rs 10,000 towards the cost of the case that will go as a contribution towards the State Consumer Welfare Fund. The case inter alia states that an agent of the insurance company approached the managing partner of the jeweller firm E. Sadasiva Rao and persuaded him to take ‘Keyman Insurance Policy’ of the company. The agent assured the insurer that in the event of any happening to the Keyman, the partnership firm will get back the sum assured. Mr. Rao immediately purchased the policy on March 31, 2002 by paying the first premium of Rs. 88,358. But to his utter surprise, Mr. Rao came to know that the insurance company has actually insured the lives of his two sons E. Suresh Kumar and E. Sridhar with the premium amount. Mr. Rao in his petition alleged that the insurance company had actually adopted unfair method of trade practices for the purpose of promoting its sale. In his petition, he urged the commission for a direction to the company to refund the premium amount. The commission after hearing the case noticed the agent had lured the complainant to purchase the policy with a false assurance. “Considering the facts and circumstances, we have no hesitation to hold the insurance company adopted unfair trade practices and is therefore liable to pay damages to the complainant,” the commission said in its judgment.
Printer friendly
page
News:
ePaper |
Front Page |
National |
Tamil Nadu |
Andhra Pradesh |
Karnataka |
Kerala |
New Delhi |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Engagements |
|
|
|
The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription Group Sites: The Hindu | The Hindu ePaper | Business Line | Business Line ePaper | Sportstar | Frontline | Publications | eBooks | Images | Home |
Copyright © 2007, The
Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of
this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of
The Hindu
|