NAUSAD KHALID Vs. ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner's Mahindra Scorpio van was stolen. That was insured with insurance company, respondent No. 1. Since his claim for insurance money was repudiated, he approached this court. By judgment Exh. P3, this court directed him to seek his remedies in a forum, where he can adduce evidence in support of his contention. The petitioner filed an appli-cation before the Insurance Ombudsman respondent No. 3. By order, Exh. P8, the Secretary of the Insurance Ombudsman informed the petitioner as follows:

(2.) The petitioner is challenging the same. On 21.5.2010 this court passed the following interim order:

(3.) Insurance Ombudsman is an author-ity before whom persons can adduce evi-dence in'support of their claims. That beingso, Insurance Ombudsman comes within the purview of the authorities mentioned in Exh. P3 judgment. As such the Insurance Ombudsman could not have validly reject-ed the petition filed by petitioner, as done in Exh. P8 order. Further, Exh. P8 order is not passed by the Insurance Ombudsman at all. It is only a communication from the Secretary of the Insurance Ombudsman to the petitioner. Insurance Ombudsman being a quasi-judicial authority, when a petition is filed before him, he has a duty to pass orders by himself and give copy of the order to the parties, which has not been done in this case. There is nothing to indicate that the Ombudsman has applied his mind to the petition with reference to Exh. P3 judgment. Accordingly, Exh. P8 is quashed.