Mukesh Kumar v. The State Bank Of India General Insurance Company Limited

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Letters Patent Appeal No.1628 of 2019 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4447 of 2019 ====================================================== Mukesh Kumar S/o Janak Sahni Resident of Village- Bisanpur Dhanraj, P.s.- Kudhni, District- Muzaffarpur ... Petitioner ... Appellant/s

Versus

1.

The State Bank of India General Insurance Company Limited through its Managing Director, Corporate and Registered Office- Natraj 101, 201 and 301, Junction of Western Express Highway and Andheri-Kurla Road, Andheri East, Mumbai-400069 2.

The State Bank of India General Insurance Company Limited through General Manager, Plot B-18 and B-19, Road No. 16, Wagle Industrial State Near Indian Oil Petrol Pump, M.I.D.C. Thane (West), Mumbai-400604 3.

The State Bank of India General Insurance Company Limited through Branch Manager, 4th Floor, Unit No. 4001, 4002, Grand Plaza Fraser Road, P.o.- G.P.O., Patna- 800001 (Bihar) 4.

The Senior Manager Sri Ram Finance Company Limited, Bhagwanpur, Muzaffarpur ... Respondents ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s :

Mr. Mazharul Hassan, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Kaushlendra Kumar Sinha, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR) Date : 10-02-2021 Heard the parties.

Aggrieved by judgment and order dated 16.07.2019 passed in C.W.J.C. No.4447 of 2019 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court, the appellant has preferred this appeal. Vehicle of the appellant was stolen on 12.1.2016 for which he had instituted an FIR being Muzaffarpur Motipur P.S.

Patna High Court L.P.A No.1628 of 2019 dt.10-02-2021 2/2 Case No.10 of 2016 dated 12.1.2016 in which police submitted charge-sheet. The vehicle was insured with State Bank of India, Insurance Company and after investigation, claim of appellant for Rs.8,41,794/- was approved by surveyor, however, petitioner received a letter dated 21.11.2017 that the claim of appellant is closed for want of required documents and appellant submitted invalid NOC and FORM 35 which could not be satisfactorily explained.

The writ petition was disposed of by learned Single Judge with liberty to petitioner to pursue his remedy before any other appropriate forum in accordance with law. This Court does not find any error or infirmity in the order passed by the learned Single Judge. Accordingly, LPA is dismissed.

(Sanjay Karol, CJ) ( S. Kumar, J) Sanjay/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 08.03.2021 Transmission Date NA