OquiliaOquilia
Legal

Punjab commission orders United India Insurance to pay burglary claim lost over plot number

The Punjab State Consumer Commission held that a wrong plot number in a bank-arranged policy did not defeat a Ludhiana firm's burglary claim, and ordered United India Insurance and Canara Bank to pay.

Key points

  • The Punjab State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission on 28 October 2026 set aside a Ludhiana district order that had dismissed a burglary claim.
  • United India Insurance must pay Rs 2,13,000 for stolen machinery and assess the stock claim; Canara Bank must pay Rs 75,000.
  • If the order is not complied with in 60 days, the insurer must pay the Rs 15 lakh claimed; the order may be appealed.
Oquilia Newsroom
Financial news desk covering SEBI, RBI, IRDAI, and Budget-related developments.
2 min read · 377 wordsहिन्दी में पढ़ें
Verified SourcesSource: Consumer commission
Circular steel vault door with bolts and time locks

Photo: Joe Mabel / Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA 4.0 (cropped). Representational image.

The Punjab State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission on 28 October 2026 ordered United India Insurance Company to pay a Ludhiana knitwear firm's burglary claim that it had rejected because the policy showed the wrong plot number. The commission also held Canara Bank, which arranged the cover, deficient in service and ordered it to pay Rs 75,000.

What Happened

According to the order, the firm's owner had loans and a cash credit limit from Canara Bank, which insured the firm's machinery and stock through United India Insurance policies. After a theft on the night of 28-29 November 2014, the insurer rejected the claim in October 2015, saying the burglary policy covered plot No. 14 while the loss was at plot No. 16. The Ludhiana District Commission dismissed the complaint in February 2022.

On appeal, the State Commission noted that the insurer's own fire policy for the same period named plot No. 16, that its investigator inspected only plot No. 16, and that nothing showed the firm had two premises. It held that plot No. 14 was a typographical mistake. On a second policy covering stock, which carried the firm's old address, the commission found that the bank's own sanction letter and stock statements showed plot No. 16, and held that the bank should have given the insurer the correct address.

The commission set aside the district order. It directed the insurer to pay Rs 2,13,000, the machinery loss assessed by its investigator, and to settle the stock claim after assessing the loss. Canara Bank must pay Rs 75,000 as compensation and litigation costs. The order must be complied with within 60 days of receiving it, failing which the insurer is liable to pay the Rs 15 lakh claimed.

What It Means

The order says an insurer cannot reject a claim over an evident address error in a policy when its own records and investigation point to the right premises, and that a bank arranging insurance for a borrower must give the insurer the correct address. Borrowers whose banks arrange cover for stock or machinery can check that the policy shows the right premises. The order may be appealed. Policyholders with rejected claims can complain through e-Daakhil or the National Consumer Helpline on 1915.

Source: Consumer commission order

Sources & Citations

  1. Consumer commission order — Consumer commission

This article was last reviewed on 1 November 2026 by Oquilia's editorial team. Every claim is sourced from primary regulatory materials (CBDT, IRDAI, RBI, SEBI, Indian Kanoon). View our methodology.

Found an error? Report an issue.