Mrs. Bakul Roy v. The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. and 4 Ors

PageoNo.#o1/3 GAHC010014232015 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oWP(C)/3017/2015o MRS.oBAKULoROYo W/OoLT.oNITINDRAoNATHoROY,oR/OoSANKARoMISSIONoROAD,oOLDoPOSTo OFFICEoGALI,oNAGAONoTOWN,oP.O.oNAGAON,oP.S.oandoDIST-oNAGAON,o ASSAM,oPIN-782001 VERSUSo THEoNEWoINDIAoASSURANCEoCO.oLTD.oando4oORSo REGD.oANDoHEADoOFFICEoREP.oBYoTHEoCHAIRMANoCUMoMANAGINGo DIRECTOR,oNEWoINDIAoASSURANCEoBUILDING,o87,oMAHATMAoGANDHIo ROAD,oFORToMUMBAI-01 2:THEoREGIONALoMANAGER oNEWoINDIAoASSURANCEoCO.oLTD. oNORTHoEASTERNoREGIONALoOFFICE oG.S.oROAD oBHANGAGARH oGHY-5 oASSAM 3:THEoDIVISIONALoMANAGER oNEWoINDIAoASSURANCEoCO.oLTD. oOPP.oTOoNAMEoCAREoHOSPITAL oG.S.oROAD oBHANGAGARH oGHY-5 oASSAM 4:THEoBRANCHoMANAGER oNEWoINDIAoASSURANCEoCO.oLTD. oJOGANNATHoMANDIRoROAD oNAGAONoTOWN Page No.# 2/3 NAGAON ASSAM PIN-782001 5:THE INSURANCE OMBUDSMAN REP. BY THE SECY. FOR THE STATE OF ASSAM MEGHALAYA MANIPUR MIZORAM ARUNACHAL PRADESH NAGALAND AND TRIPURA C/O JEEVAN NIVESH 5TH FLOOR NEAR PANBAZAR OVER BRIDGE S.S.ROAD GHY-1 ASSA For the petitioner (s) : Mr. A. K. Purkayastha, Advocate

For the respondent (s) : Mr. S. Dutta, Senior Advocate Mr. C. Sarma, Advocate

BEFORE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH

03.01.2024 The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner being aggrieved on the repudiation of the insurance claim by the respondent Insurance Company as well as the judgment and order dated 10.09.2013 passed by the learned Insurance Ombudsman in Complaint Case No.11-G1-076/12-13 and also seeking a direction upon the respondent Insurance Company to pay the said claimed amount to the petitioner.

¶2Upon hearing the matter at length, it transpires that various factual aspects would be required to be adjudicated upon and these aspects Page No.# 3/3 cannot be adjudicated under Article 226 of the Constitution taking into account that various disputed questions of facts have to be adjudicated upon. The petitioner, therefore, would be well advised to approach the appropriate forum wherein the factual aspects can be determined.

¶3Taking into account the above, this Court is not inclined to entertain the instant writ petition.

¶4Be that as it may, taking into account that the petitioner has been bonafidely pursuing the instant writ proceedings since 21.05.2015 till date, the period from 21.05.2015 till date, shall be excluded while computing the period of limitation in preferring such proceedings as available under the law.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant