Friday,
February 8, 2002, Chandigarh, India
|
|
‘Arrest stall’ gets good response Ludhiana, February 7 The “arrest stall” attracted numerous participants. Even organisers made a lot of money as after every second there was a request for somebody’s arrest. The participants were required to pay Rs 10 and get anybody behind bars. The students’ team handcuffs the person. He was released after his friend paid Rs 20 for it. Shruti, one of the attendants at the stall, said, “We are getting very good response and nobody has taken it seriously. They understand that this is only for fun. After all it is a game”. The swinging boat although attracted many, only the dare-devils could gather courage to have a ride on it. Tombola stall also did brisk business. Other stalls put up at the fete included fast food, cold drinks and hosiery. Other activities offered at the fete were wheel of fortune, fishing the bottles, coin in the bucket and lighting the candles. |
Forum penalises United India Insurance Ludhiana, February 7 According to the complaint, the consumer got his Maruti car (PB-10-AJ-9392) insured with the company. The consumer stated before the forum that the vehicle met with an accident on December 6, 2000, and he informed the company about it on December 7, 2000. After that, he got his car repaired form M/s KS Automobiles. The consumer said the company had appointed a surveyor for assessing loss, who visited the workshop and verified the facts. A bill of Rs 30,141 was submitted, but he was paid only Rs 23,300 on March 6, 2001. He wanted to know from company officials why less payment was made to him, but he got no satisfactory answer. He even wrote a letter to the company, on March 17, 2001, in this regard. The consumer stated that the surveyor had assessed the loss at Rs 26,835 and the respondent made the payment of Rs 23,300 only. It was alleged the loss had not been assessed properly and about Rs 7,000 was deducted illegally from the total claim. It was alleged there was deficiency in services on the part of the company. He demanded the company should be directed to pay the balance amount and Rs 5,000 on account of compensation along with interest at the rate of 18 per cent per annum. The company pleaded, it had appointed Mr G.P.S. Miglani as surveyor to assess the loss after the accident, who had submitted his report on January 5, 2001. The respondent said that after the receipt of the report, Mr Varun Chandok was appointed for reinspection of the car and to submit the bill verification report after repairs. The company maintained that after following proper procedure and scrutinising the submitted reports, the company officials finally settled the claim for Rs 23,300. |
| Punjab | Haryana | Jammu & Kashmir | Himachal Pradesh | Regional Briefs | Nation | Editorial | | Business | Sport | World | Mailbag | In Spotlight | Chandigarh Tribune | Ludhiana Tribune 50 years of Independence | Tercentenary Celebrations | | 122 Years of Trust | Calendar | Weather | Archive | Subscribe | Suggestion | E-mail | |