Tag: supreme court

SC refuses to entertain bail plea of Rakesh Wadhawan, asks him to approach HC, BFSI News, ET BFSI

Banking & Finance

[ad_1]

Read More/Less


New Delhi, The Supreme Court Friday refused to entertain the bail plea filed on health grounds by jailed businessman Rakesh Wadhawan, accused of money laundering in the multi-crore rupees Punjab and Maharashtra Co-operative (PMC) Bank fraud case, saying that he has been in hospital more than the jail. A bench comprising Chief Justice N V Ramana and Justices Surya Kant and Hima Kohli permitted senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for Wadhawan, to withdraw the bail plea to approach the high court.

Rohatgi referred to the medical condition of the accused and said that he has been in jail for quite some time.

“I see, he has been in hospital more than in jail. Go to the high court,” the bench said prompting Rohatgi to say that it was the high court which refused the bail.

“File after some time. Not now. Alright permitted to withdraw to approach the high court,” the bench said.

The Bombay High Court on October 14 had refused to grant bail to Wadhawan.

Wadhawan, founder of Housing Development Infrastructure Limited (HDIL), was arrested by the Enforcement Directorate in 2019 in the case.

The high court had said that Wadhawan’s submission that he was immediately required to be released on temporary bail on medical grounds, was “not justified”.

It had said that denial of medical bail was in no way a breach of Wadhawan’s fundamental right to life since he had been provided adequate medical treatment by the state prison authorities whenever required.

Wadhawan, who had undergone a surgery for pacemaker implantation, had sought that he be released on bail so that he can seek discharge from the civic-run KEM Hospital in the city, where he is recuperating while in judicial custody, and shift to a private hospital while out on bail.

He had said in his plea that he suffered from severe comorbidities, that his immune system had been compromised after having contracted COVID-19 recently, and that he was susceptible to contracting infections and ailments while at the civic hospital due to the heavy footfall the hospital received.

He had also said that the KEM Hospital did not have an ICU facility specifically meant for those suffering from cardiac issues.

The fraud at PMC Bank came to light in September 2019 after the Reserve Bank of India discovered that the bank had allegedly created fictitious accounts to hide over Rs 4,355 crore of loans extended to almost-bankrupt Housing Development and Infrastructure Limited (HDIL).

According to RBI, the PMC bank masked 44 problematic loan accounts, including those of HDIL, by tampering with its core banking system, and the accounts were accessible only to limited staff members.

Mumbai Police’s Economic Offences Wing and the ED had registered offences against senior bank officials and HDIL promoters.



[ad_2]

CLICK HERE TO APPLY

Leave a comment , , , , , ,

Supreme Court stays notice by UP police on Yes Bank in Dish TV case

Banking & Finance

[ad_1]

Read More/Less


The Supreme Court on Tuesday has stayed a notice by the Uttar Pradesh policy on Yes Bank from exercising its voting rights in the Dish TV annual general meeting.

This is a big relief to the private sector lender who can now participate in the AGM of Dish TV, which is being held today.

The bank had filed a petition with the Supreme Court against the decision of the Allahabad High Court, which had dismissed its plea on de-freezing of voting rights.

Yes Bank is the largest shareholder of Dish TV with about 25 per cent stake. It had earlier called for an EGM for removal of Dish TV’s Managing Director Jawahar Goel and four other directors and also the appointment of new directors on the grounds that the current board had approved a rights issue merely to dilute the bank’s shareholding and was not following good corporate governance norms.

[ad_2]

CLICK HERE TO APPLY

Leave a comment , , , ,

YES Bank | Dish TV: Freeze on Yes Bank’s 25.6% stake in Dish TV spooks private lenders, BFSI News, ET BFSI

Banking & Finance

[ad_1]

Read More/Less


Private credit lenders who often provide finance against pledge of shares are rattled that they will not be able to exercise their rights as lenders, if a police move freezing Yes Bank’s 25.6% stake in Dish TV sets a precedent.

On Tuesday, the Supreme Court will hear Yes Bank’s appeal against an Allahabad High Court order that dismissed the lender’s plea seeking to lift the freeze on its voting rights in Dish TV, which is operated by Subhash Chandra’s Essel Group. At the high court, Yes Bank had challenged a move by Uttar Pradesh’s Gautam Buddh Nagar crime branch last week to freeze its voting rights in Dish TV.

Dish TV has scheduled an annual general meeting on Tuesday (November 30) to seek shareholders’ consent to its Rs 1,000 crore rights issue – a move that is opposed by Yes Bank, the largest shareholder. “The private lender will not be able to exercise its voting rights if the Supreme Court does not restore it,” said one of the lenders.

The court is likely to hear the matter in the first half of the day, while the AGM is scheduled at 3.00 pm.

Yes Bank on September 3 had suggested reconstitution of Dish TV’s board and opposed the proposed rights issue as it would dilute its holding in the company.

Private equity lenders say equity pledge is one of the most liquid collateral and freezing it is a major setback.

“The courts in India might eventually resolve this issue. However, if the police interfere and even cause a few months delay in enforcing security, then the value of the debt gets significantly eroded,” said one of the lenders, who did not want to be named.

Private credit providers are also rattled that a police complaint was filed when there are well-established procedures for dispute resolution, such as the National Company Law Tribunal. Further, the case was registered at the crime branch in Uttar Pradesh when both Yes Bank and Dish TV have their registered offices in Mumbai.

One of the lawyers present at the Allahabad High Court said Yes Bank’s senior counsel, Abhishek Manu Singhvi, pointed out that “the UP sub-inspector will become supreme and can tomorrow attach paintings in Kerala and homes in Mumbai based on frivolous complaints filed by defaulting borrowers”.

The UP crime branch order follows a complaint by Subhash Chandra against the bank, accusing its former chief executive, Rana Kapoor, of fraud in brokering a merger between Videocon D2H and Dish TV. Kapoor is facing allegations of financial irregularities at the bank and is currently in jail.

Yes Bank had provided a Rs 5,270 crore loan to Essel group of companies against the pledge of Dish TV shares in 2016. After the group companies of Essel started defaulting, Yes Bank invoked the shares in June 2020 and recalled the loan the following month. IndusInd Bank, L&T Finance, housing finance company, HDFC Ltd and Clix Capital are among other lenders to have invoked the share pledge of Dish TV.

Subhash Chandra first filed an FIR against Yes Bank at Greater Noida in September 2020 and initiated a civil proceeding against the bank at Delhi’s Saket District Court for invocation of shares. The Saket court initially restrained Yes Bank from selling the shares but withdrew the proceedings in August 2021.

On November 6, Dish TV informed the stock exchange that it has received orders from the UP-crime branch to restrict Yes Bank from the dealing with 445.3 million shares (amounting to a 25.6% stake) of Dish TV until the investigation is completed or further order. On November 7, Dish TV informed the exchanges about the proposed EGM on November 30.



[ad_2]

CLICK HERE TO APPLY

Leave a comment , , , , , , ,

Crypto industry urges govt to take nuanced approach, asks investors to remain calm, BFSI News, ET BFSI

Personal Finance

[ad_1]

Read More/Less


The cryptocurrency industry on Wednesday urged the government to take a nuanced approach towards regulating crypto assets in India and asked investors in the country to remain calm and not arrive at a rushed conclusion, a day after the government listed for introduction a Bill to ban all such cryptocurrencies, with some exceptions.

‘The Cryptocurrency and Regulation of Official Digital Currency Bill, 2021′, to be introduced in the winter session of Parliament beginning November 29, seeks to “create a facilitative framework for creation of the official digital currency to be issued by the Reserve Bank of India. The Bill also seeks to prohibit all private cryptocurrencies in India, however, it allows for certain exceptions to promote the underlying technology of cryptocurrency and its uses”.

BuyUcoin CEO Shivam Thakral said it expects the Bill to accommodate the aspirations of Indian crypto owners, Indian crypto entrepreneurs, and investors who have put their faith in India’s crypto growth story.

“The crypto Bill should be flexible enough for young blockchain projects to flourish and we strongly believe that there is a strong case for a standard process for new cryptocurrencies before they get listed on any exchange in India for trading.

“I think popular crypto-assets like Bitcoin and Ethereum will be pre-approved by the regulators for getting listed on the exchange. We also request the government to give immediate clarity on the taxation and filing of crypto assets,” Thakral said.

CoinSwitch Kuber founder and CEO Ashish Singhal said the industry has been actively communicating with all stakeholders keeping investor protection at the forefront.

“Our discussions in the last few weeks indicate there is a broad agreement on ensuring that customers are protected, financial system stability is reinforced and India is able to take advantage of the crypto technology revolution…

“As of now, I urge all crypto asset investors in the country to remain calm, do their own research before arriving at a rushed conclusion,” said Singhal, who is also the co-chair of the Blockchain and Crypto Assets Council (BACC).

Cryptocurrency exchange CoinDCX’s spokesperson said a well-assessed and thought-through regulation will pave the way for greater adoption of the technology and will help millions of Indians embrace this new-age asset class.

OKEx.com CEO Jay Hao said India is home to the highest number of crypto owners in the world and the onus lies on the government to protect the interest of a large number of crypto investors in the country.

“We urge the government to take a nuanced approach towards regulating crypto assets in India. With the positive outcome of the cryptocurrency Bill, India will embark on an exciting journey of becoming the global leader in crypto, Defi, and NFTs,” Hao said.

Currently, there is no regulation or any ban on the use of cryptocurrencies in the country. Against this backdrop, Prime Minister Narendra Modi earlier this month held a meeting on the cryptocurrencies with senior officials, and indications are that strong regulatory steps could be taken to deal with the issue.

There has been a rising number of advertisements, featuring even film stars, promising easy and high returns on investments in cryptocurrencies in recent times, amid concerns over such currencies being allegedly used for luring investors with misleading claims.

Last week, the Standing Committee on Finance, chaired by BJP member Jayant Sinha, met the representatives of crypto exchanges and BACC, among others, and arrived at a conclusion that cryptocurrencies should not be banned, but it should be regulated.

The RBI has repeatedly reiterated its strong views against cryptocurrencies saying they pose serious threats to the macroeconomic and financial stability of the country and also doubted the number of investors trading on them as well as their claimed market value.

RBI Governor Shaktikanta Das has also reiterated his views against allowing cryptocurrencies saying they are a serious threat to any financial system since they are unregulated by central banks.

The RBI had announced its intent to come out with an official digital currency, in the face of proliferation of cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin about which the central bank has had many concerns.

Private digital currencies/ virtual currencies/ crypto currencies have gained popularity in the past one decade or so. Here, regulators and governments have been sceptical about these currencies and are apprehensive about the associated risks.

On March 4, 2021, the Supreme Court had set aside an RBI circular of April 6, 2018, prohibiting banks and entities regulated by it from providing services in relation to virtual currencies.



[ad_2]

CLICK HERE TO APPLY

Leave a comment , , , , ,

Govt lists bill in winter session to ban all private cryptocurrency, BFSI News, ET BFSI

Personal Finance

[ad_1]

Read More/Less


NEW DELHI: The government on Tuesday listed the Cryptocurrency and Regulation of Official Digital Currency Bill for introduction during the winter session of Parliament, which will seek to “prohibit all private cryptocurrencies” but provide for certain exceptions “to promote the underlying technology” and “its uses”.

The proposed bill — which will also put in place a framework for Reserve Bank of India (RBI) to create an official digital currency — comes amid a raging debate over whether the government should ban private cryptocash or regulate them like shares and bonds.

A very vocal lobby led by unregulated exchanges has been campaigning for their inclusion under a regulatory system, as opposed to an outright ban the government had earlier proposed.

RBI has been backing a ban on cryptocurrency, arguing it can be used for illegal purposes apart from limiting the central bank’s ability to manage inflation, foreign exchange and the overall economy.

It, however, sees no problems with the use of technology for managing logistic chains or land records but is opposed to its use as a financial instrument.

It cannot be called a currency since the sovereign only enjoys that right,” the apex bank has pointed out. The Centre, however, seems inclined to ban bitcoins, making it clear that dabbling in them carries a clear risk.

While there have been observations that a ban will be tough to enforce, or that it will only drive the entire growing trade underground, those supporting a prohibition have argued that even gambling or drug trafficking are illegal and those found violating the law face strict action.

The divergent views had prompted PM Narendra Modi to recently hold consultations and call for global cooperation on the issue. While China recently banned all cryptocurrencies, El Salvador is the sole country to permit them for official use.

Government sources said the bill has not been finalised yet and is unlikely to be introduced during the first week of the winter session that starts on Monday. But all eyes are on how the government defines the “uses” of cryptocurrency.

In case it allows it to be treated as an asset or a commodity, as a section within the government has argued, it will pave the way for their trading on exchanges. The fear is that trading would allow the instrument to be used as a store of value, although officially it will not be a medium of exchange. There are concerns that the moment trading is permitted, people may use cryptocurrencies such as bitcoins, for making part payment for purchase of property or for overseas transfer.

While the RBI had banned investments in cryptocurrencies, the Supreme Court had held the circular illegal. In the meantime, the government-appointed committee headed by SC Garg, the then economic affairs secretary, submitted its recommendations seeking a ban and the government had planned to introduce a legislation during the Budget session.

But with the session cut short, the bill “prohibiting” private cryptocurrencies could not be introduced, resulting in a fresh round of consultations.



[ad_2]

CLICK HERE TO APPLY

Leave a comment , , , ,

Cryptocurrency to be regulated and gains taxed; govt to amend I-T laws, BFSI News, ET BFSI

Personal Finance

[ad_1]

Read More/Less


With the consensus on allowing cryptocurrencies gaining momentum, the government is mulling changes in the income tax laws to bring cryptocurrencies under the tax net, with some changes that could form part of the budget next year, a top official said.

Revenue secretary Tarun Bajaj said that in terms of income tax, some people are already paying capital gains tax on the income from cryptocurrency, and in respect of goods and services tax (GST) also the law is “very clear” that the rate would be applicable as those in case of other services.

“We will take a call. I understand that already people are paying taxes on it. Now that it has really grown a lot, we will see whether we can actually bring in some changes in law position or not. But that would be a budget activity. We are already nearing the budget, we have to look at that point of time,” Bajaj told PTI in an interview.

Asked if a provision of TCS (tax collected at source) could be introduced for crypto trading, the secretary said “if we come up with a new law then we will see what is to be done”.

“But yes, if you make money you have to pay taxes. We have already got some taxes, some have treated it as an asset and paid capital gains tax on it,” he said.

Asked whether people involved in cryptocurrency trading would be categorized as facilitator, brokerage and trading platform and how the taxation would be done under GST, Bajaj said “there would already be such things available in other services also. So whatever GST rate they are taxed at, that will be applicable on them.”

“They have to get themselves registered. The GST law is very clear. If there is an activity, if there is a broker who is helping people and charging brokerage fee, GST would get charged,” he said.

Separately, the government is likely to introduce a bill on cryptocurrencies during the Winter Session of Parliament beginning November 29, amid concerns over such currencies being allegedly used for luring investors with misleading claims.

Notably, there have been a rising number of advertisements, featuring even film stars, promising easy and high returns on investments in cryptocurrencies in recent times.

Currently, there is no regulation or any ban on use of cryptocurrencies in the country. Against this backdrop, Prime Minister Narendra Modi, last week, held a meeting on cryptocurrencies with senior officials and indications are that strong regulatory steps could be taken to deal with the issue.

Earlier this week, the Standing Committee on Finance, chaired by BJP member Jayant Sinha, met the representatives of crypto exchanges, block chain and Crypto Assets Council (BACC), among others, and arrived at a conclusion that cryptocurrencies should not be banned, but it should be regulated.

The RBI has repeatedly reiterated its strong views against cryptocurrencies saying they pose serious threats to the macroeconomic and financial stability of the country and also doubted the number of investors trading on them as well as their claimed market value.

RBI governor Shaktikanta Das too earlier this month had reiterated his views against allowing cryptocurrencies saying they are a serious threat to any financial system since they are unregulated by central banks.

The Supreme Court in early March 2020, had nullified the RBI circular banning cryptocurrencies. Following this on February 5, 2021, the central bank had instituted an internal panel to suggest a model of the central bank’s digital currency.

The RBI had announced its intent to come out with an official digital currency, in the face of proliferation of cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin about which the central bank has many concerns.

Private digital currencies/virtual currencies/crypto currencies have gained popularity in the past one decade or so. Here, regulators and governments have been sceptical about these currencies and are apprehensive about the associated risks.

It can be noted that on March 4, 2021, the Supreme Court had set aside an RBI circular of April 6, 2018, prohibiting banks and entities regulated by it from providing services in relation to virtual currencies.



[ad_2]

CLICK HERE TO APPLY

Leave a comment , , , , , ,

Consortium of PSU banks agrees to infuse funds for completion of stalled Amrapali projects: SC told

Banking & Finance

[ad_1]

Read More/Less



On the occasion of Diwali, 150 flats completed by National Buildings Construction Corporation (NBCC) in a stalled project of Amrapali were given to the homebuyers in a small ceremony organised with the help of court receiver.

[ad_2]

CLICK HERE TO APPLY

Leave a comment , , , , , , ,

PNB Housing chief on Carlyle deal pull-out, BFSI News, ET BFSI

Personal Finance

[ad_1]

Read More/Less


Pulling out from the Rs 4,000-crore Carlyle-led deal was a conscious choice of PNB Housing Finance as the company did not want to entangle in a protracted legal battle and lose focus on the lending business, its Managing Director and CEO Hardayal Prasad said.

Last month, the company said it has decided not to proceed with the Rs 4,000-crore capital infusion deal led by Carlyle as a legal battle will not be in the best interests of the company and its stakeholders.

The deal was finalised on May 31. Soon after, it mired into a controversy with regards to the valuation of the shares being offered to the investors. Subsequently, the matter reached the Securities Appellate Tribunal (SAT) after the intervention of markets regulator Sebi.

“If you look at it, there is nothing that we did wrong. We followed the policy of the Sebi, the LODR instructions, we tried to do everything. It was only a question of interpretation.

“But, it was looking like a long-drawn process due to hurdles in legal approvals,” Prasad told PTI in an interview.

He said the split verdict of the SAT also proves that it was a matter of interpretation only as the company’s contention was vindicated by one of the judges in the matter, reiterating: “I don’t think we did anything wrong”.

Prasad added that one of the judges, the presiding officer, gave the judgment in the company’s favour. “But, we are very clear that we don’t want any protracted legal battle. We want to concentrate on our work and go ahead.”

He said a significant amount of bandwidth is utilised when you are going to do it and it would have been a slightly long-protected legal battle.

“I am not in that business, we are in the business of lending, in the business of financing. What is the point in remaining distracted by these kinds of things. So, we decided that okay they are the regulator and we decided to go ahead with the pull-back (from the deal),” Prasad said.

After the split verdict of the SAT in August, Sebi had approached the Supreme Court. However, the apex court dismissed Sebi’s appeal in late October as it became infructuous when PNB Housing Finance said it will pull out from the deal.

The company has filed an application to withdraw its appeal to the Securities Appellate Tribunal.

Prasad said the company is much in the need of the desired capital and it will look for all the venues to raise money, be it through borrowings, qualified institutional placement (QIP), rights issues or preference issues.

“Whether we do it through borrowings or QIP, preferential issue, rights issue, any other things that we can do, we are keeping everything open and we will see to it and at the right time, we will approach the board to permit us to raise the money,” Prasad said.

He added that the company will continue to look for opportunities.

“We remain engaged with everybody. See how we can move forward in terms of capital raising. We require to raise the capital, despite a solid capital adequacy ratio, and the gearing position.

“But, we would still like to raise capital to enable us to grow even faster than we are growing,” he said.

Right now, all stakeholders of the company remain supportive of the company. They know that the capital is required, they know that the company has a great, bright future, Prasad added.

They have also seen that in the past nine quarters, there has been a slow and steady movement on a lot of fronts.

“So, we would do it, since they are all supportive and they understand that the company requires it. We will look at all options that are there in terms of raising the money,” Prasad said.

State-owned Punjab National Bank (PNB) is the company’s promoter with a 32.6 per cent holding in the company.

On being asked what was PNB’s opinion on pulling out from the deal, he said: “We explained to them that this is the reason and we would like to pull back from the deal. Because of the protracted legal nature, it is not taking us anywhere and it is distracting the overall focus of the business.”

All of them agreed that this is the right thing to do, Prasad added.

In the second quarter ended September 2021, the company posted a net profit of Rs 235 crore, down by 25 per cent from a year ago, mainly on account of a fall in interest income and higher provisioning for bad loans.



[ad_2]

CLICK HERE TO APPLY

Leave a comment , , , , , , ,

Private banks’ NPAs fall in Q2 as economy charts recovery path, BFSI News, ET BFSI

Banking & Finance

[ad_1]

Read More/Less


With the economy opening up, the asset quality of private banks improved in the September quarter. Further, banks efforts in reducing slippages, improved collections, better recoveries from written off accounts and RBI mandated loans recast also helped banks keep a lid on NPAs.

While the year on year NPA figures of most banks were higher than the last quarter’s figures, they are not comparable as after the Supreme Court‘s stay on classifying loans that were standard as on August 31 from NPAs banks had reported NPAs under proforma figures.

The drop

HDFC Bank, India’s largest private sector lender, reported a drop in gross non-performing assets (GNPAs) to Rs 16,346 crore during July-September against Rs 17,099 crore in the preceding quarter. Provisions and contingencies also dropped to Rs 3,924.70 crore during the quarter compared with Rs 4,830.84 crore in the June quarter. GNPA ratio fell to 1.35 per cent as of September from 1.47 per cent in the June quarter. It was 1.08 per cent in the same quarter, a year ago.

ICICI Bank‘s gross non-performing assets fell to 4.82 per cent of gross advances as on September 30, against 5.15 per cent in the June quarter. Net NPAs (bad loans) also fell to 0.99 per cent from 1.16 per cent sequentially in the September quarter.

Federal Bank‘s asset quality improved on a sequential basis as gross NPA came at 3.24% as against 3.50% in the previous quarter. Its net NPA stood at 1.12% from 1.23% quarter-on-quarter (QoQ). However, the gross NPA during the year-ago quarter stood at 2.84% whereas net NPA at 0.99%. Provisions (other than tax) and contingencies declined to Rs 245 crore as against Rs 543 crore in the previous quarter and Rs 532 crore in the year-ago quarter.

Axis Bank and Kotak Bank

Axis Bank’s gross NPAs came in at 3.53% in the second quarter, lower than 3.85% in the June quarter and 4.18% in the previous year period. Meanwhile, the net NPA ratio during the quarter stood at l.08%.

Kotak Mahindra Bank’s gross NPAs during the second quarter stood at 3.19% compared with 3.56% in the June quarter. However, it was higher than 2.70% in the year-ago quarter. Meanwhile, the net NPA improved to 1.06% versus 1.28% on a sequential basis, and remained flat on a year-on-year basis.

What Crisil says

GNPAs of banks will rise to 8-9 per cent this fiscal, well below the peak of 11.2 per cent seen at the end of fiscal 2018, with the COVID-19 relief measures such as restructuring dispensation, and the Emergency Credit Line Guarantee Scheme (ECLGS) helping limit the rise, according to CRISIL Ratings.

GNPAs as at March-end 2021 had declined to 7.5 per cent against 8.2 per cent as at March-end 2020.

With about 2 per cent of bank credit expected under restructuring by the end of this fiscal, stressed assets ― comprising gross NPAs and loan book under restructuring ― should touch 10-11 per cent (against March-end 2021 estimate of about 9 per cent), the credit rating agency said.



[ad_2]

CLICK HERE TO APPLY

Leave a comment , , , , , , , ,

Insurance claim liable to be rejected if lapsed on account of non-payment of premium: SC

Banking & Finance

[ad_1]

Read More/Less


An insurance claim can be rejected if the policy has lapsed on account of non-payment of premium, said the Supreme Court which stressed that the terms of an insurance policy have to be strictly interpreted.

The apex court observation came while setting aside an order of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) that ordered additional compensation in a road accident case.

A bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Bela M Trivedi said it is a well-settled legal position that in a contract of insurance there is a requirement of Uberrima fides i.e. good faith on the part of the insured.

“It is clear that the terms of insurance policy have to be strictly construed, and it is not permissible to rewrite the contract while interpreting the terms of the policy,” the bench said.

The top court was hearing an appeal filed by the Life Insurance Corporation (LIC) against the judgement of the NCDRC that had set aside the order passed by the State Commission.

In the case, the woman’s husband had taken a life insurance policy under the Jeevan Suraksha Yojana from the Life Insurance Corporation under which a sum of . ₹3.75 lakh was assured by LIC.

Besides this amount, in case of death by accident an additional sum of ₹3.75 lakh was also assured.

The insurance premium of the said policy was to be paid six-monthly, however, there was a default in payment.

On March 6, 2012, the husband of the complainant met with an accident and succumbed to the injuries on March 21, 2012.

The complainant after the death of her husband filed a claim before LIC and was paid a sum of ₹3.75 lakh to her. However, the additional sum of ₹3.75 lakh towards the Accident claim benefit was denied.

The complainant, therefore, approached the District Forum by filing a complaint seeking the said amount towards the Accident claim benefit. The District Forum allowed the appeal of the woman and directed the payment of an additional sum of ₹3.75 lakh towards the Accident claim benefit.

The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission set aside the order which was further challenged in the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission.

The NCDRC set aside the order passed by the State Commission.

The apex court said in the instant case, condition no. 11 of the policy stipulated that the policy has to be in force when the accident takes place.

“In the instant case, the policy had lapsed on October 14, 2011, and was not in force on the date of accident i.e. on March 6, 2012. It was sought to be revived on March 9, 2012, after the accident in question, and that too without disclosing the fact of the accident which had taken place on March 6, 2012,” the apex court said in its October 29 order.

The top court said apart from the fact that the complainant had not come with clean hands to claim the add on/extra Accident benefit of the policy, the policy in question was not in force on the date of the accident as per condition no. 11 of the policy, the claim for extra Accident benefit was rightly rejected by the Corporation.

“Since clause 3 of the said terms and conditions of the policy permitted the renewal of the discontinued policy, the appellant-Corporation had revived the policy of complainant by accepting the payment of premium after the due date and paid ₹3,75,000 as assured under the policy, nonetheless for the Accident benefit, the policy had to be in force for the full sum assured on the date of accident as per the said condition no. 11,” the bench said.

The apex court said the accident benefit could have been claimed and availed of only if the accident had taken place after the renewal of the policy.

“The Court, therefore, is of the opinion that the impugned order passed by the NCDRC setting aside the order passed by the Commission and reviving the order passed by the District Forum was highly erroneous and liable to be set aside,” the bench said.

[ad_2]

CLICK HERE TO APPLY

Leave a comment , , , , ,
1 2 3 … 9