Bhanderi vs. Bank: Compensation Dispute

The case of Bhanderi vs. Bank revolves around a compensation dispute between the appellant, Mrs. Bhanderi, and the Bank over the insurance claim of her deceased husband. Despite the Bank’s attempt to claim otherwise, the NCDRC upheld the decision of deficiency of service on the Bank’s part. The appellant is seeking the full compensation amount of Rs 5 lakhs as awarded by the District Forum. Stay tuned to learn more about this legal battle!


  • The appellant’s spouse obtained an insurance form from the Bank on 21 July 2008 and submitted it to the Manager.
  • The deceased, Ladhabhai Thakarsibhai Bhanderi, was an account holder at the Bank’s Dhutarpur Branch in Jamnagar.
  • The Bank alleged that the form was not submitted in time and was taken back by the deceased for discussion with relatives.
  • The deceased met with an accident on 1 August 2008 and passed away on 11 August 2008.
  • The claim for a compensation of Rs 5 lakhs was made by the appellant citing accidental death.
  • The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission upheld the decision that the insured was not liable due to the absence of insurance cover.

Also Read: Environmental Violations Case: TNPCB v. Copper Slag Unit


  • The appellant argued that the compensation amount was reduced from Rs 5 lakhs to Rs 2 lakhs without justification.
  • NCDRC acknowledged the Bank’s deficiency of service.
  • The Bank claimed that the form was taken back by the deceased and resubmitted after office hours on a later date.
  • The Bank has already complied with the NCDRC order by issuing a cheque of Rs 2 lakhs to the appellant as compensation.
  • The appellant has refused to encash the Rs 2 lakhs cheque as she believes she is entitled to the full compensation amount of Rs 5 lakhs awarded by the District Forum.
  • The appellant argues that there was no deficiency of service on the part of the Bank.
  • The account holder passed away on 10 August 2008, just nine days after the accident on 1 August 2008, and the Bank was notified the following day.

Also Read: High Court Upholds Decision on Minimum Eligibility Cut-Off in Judicial Promotions Case


  • The Bank admitted no receipt was given to anyone depositing the application form.
  • The defence of the Bank claiming the deceased had withdrawn the form was rejected by all relevant forums.
  • Three persons, including the spouse of the appellant, submitted forms on the same day with sequential Serial Numbers.
  • Concurrent findings of all three fora confirmed there was a deficiency of service on the part of the Bank.
  • No insurance cover existed due to the Bank’s failure to deduct and pay the premium to the insurer.
  • The Bank’s explanations were considered inadequate and an attempt to avoid accountability.
  • The Bank’s failure resulted in the deceased not receiving the insurance cover they were entitled to.
  • The NCDRC’s decision to reduce compensation from Rs 5 lakhs to Rs 2 lakhs was deemed unjustified.
  • The compensation amount was increased to Rs 5 lakhs, to be paid to the appellant within 60 days of the order.
  • The appeal was allowed with no order as to costs.
  • The Bank’s lack of explanation regarding the application form at Serial No 352 was noted by the NCDRC.

Also Read: Protecting LGBTQ+ Rights: Supreme Court’s Landmark Judgment on Habeas Corpus Petitions


Case Number: C.A. No.-000979-000979 / 2020

Click here to read/download original judgement

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *