Miscellaneous Policy (General) - Gbic.co.in

Respondent to pay Rs.11205/-, with simple interest @ 7.5% per annum on the sum to becalculated from 14-9-2001.Ahmedabad Ombudsman CentreCase No. NIA / 1 / 166Mr. Dhiren C. ShahVs.The New India Assurance Co. Ltd.Award Dated 14.3.2005There were four Claims under 4 different Policies. Out of which Claims under three Policieswere settled by the Respondent in November 2003 and in July 2004. The Hearing was heldfor the unpaid Claim of Rs. 3,47,436/- It is observed from the documents that the Insured inthe subject Claim is a Public Limited Company. Held that under The RPG Rules, thesubject Claim is beyond the ambit of this Forum and hence, advised the Complainant toagitate his case in any other appropriate Forum.Ahmedabad Ombudsman CentreCase No. OIC / 1 / 153Mr. Harish N. GohelVs.Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.Award Dated 15.3.2005Complainant lodged a Claim of Rs. 1,69,700/- towards loss sustained to his Fishing Boat.Respondent offered Rs. 37,305/- net and sent Discharge Voucher which was not executedby him. Respondent submitted that the Complainant made all payments in cash and he didnot submit any proof of cash withdrawals and due to lack of credible vouchers, theSurveyors assessed the loss what they considered fair and reasonable to the best of theirknowledge and experience. On perusal of documents, it is observed that the Surveyorslisted out 17 items and has indicated against each of it the Claimed amount and theallowed amount. Out of these 17 items, for two items aggregating to Rs. 58,000/-, noamount was allowed by the Surveyor because of the amount being very high and paid bycash. Conclusion arrived at is that the Surveyor has made substantial deduction from theclaimed amount and totally rejected the claim against two items as mentioned above whichis not convincing. Respondent to pay Rs. 52,965/- net to the Complainant.Ahmedabad Ombudsman CentreCase No. 002 / 0194Mr. Vijay G. ShahVs.The New India Assurance Co. Ltd.Award Dated 17.03.2005Complainant suffered loss of valuable items, insured under Householders’ Policies, by theftin two occasions. He lodged Claim for Rs.81675 under Policy No.230500 / 48 / 01 / 06108andRs.215000/- under Policy No.07762. Respondent admitted the Claim and offered Rs.21526/-and Rs.133030/- respectively. During Hearing, the items involved were compared with theSchedule of Articles attached to the Policy and observed that loss of Camera and Cashwere not included under Policy No.06108. Complainant agreed with it and consented to theoffer of Rs.21526/-. As regards the loss under Policy No.07762, it is observed that Golditems of 8 Tola which was covered under the Policy were not considered for settlement bythe Respondent, In addition to earlier offer of Rs.133030/-, the Respondent to payadditional Rs.32000/- towards loss of Gold Items.