After two years of being robbed at the gunpoint in Paris, the insurance company of Kim Kardashian is filed litigation against her bodyguard and the US security firm around $6.1 million.

The litigation was filed in Delaware on Wednesday by AIG of the company and charges Pascal Duvier and his company Protect Security for violating the contract.

TMZ, the Celebrity website firstly filed the litigation case ordering Duvier to left the lavish residence where Kardashian was living in October, during Paris Fashion Week along with her two sisters to the nearest club.

Consequently, Kardashian has been left without safety. According to the report of TMZ, the litigation case also charged Duvier for being failed to plug a number of rifting at the property that allocated the gunmen to enter being masked.

The five anonymous men locked her in the bathroom after tying and stifling her and then looted jewels of  $10.6 million, along with with a diamond ring which she had posted on her Instagram account and got from husband as a gift.

TMZ said that the amount of  $1.6 million which has been paid to Kardashian after looting, has been seeded by AIG stalking the firm and bodyguard.

The justices of France convicted 11 suspects for the involvement with the biggest robbery individually in 20 years in France. One piece, cross,  sheathed with diamond has been retrieved.

Aomar Ait Khedache, the convicted robbery leader told the investigators that he had tried the lot to find a purchaser for the 10-carat ring of Kardashian’s but as it was a very recognizable asset, he had to sell it to the unfamiliar third party.

Related Articles
Next Story
Going Viral
16 States Indicts the US President Due to Emergency Declaration on  Border Wall Issue

16 States Indicts the US President Due to Emergency Declaration on Border Wall Issue

by Haimantee Ghosh February 19, 2019
Sixteen United States indicted the US President Donald Trump’s administration over his decision to announce a national emergency to sponsor a wall on the Southern border with Mexico, claiming the move breached the constitution. The litigation, filed in a federal court in California, explained the order by the US President was contradictory to the Presentment Clause which figures out the legal proceedings and the Appropriations Clause, which defines Congress as...