Orissa

Kendujhar

23/2000

Sri Basanta Kumar Rout - Complainant(s)

Versus

1. Branch Manager, the Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Sri G.P. Mohapatra & P.K. Upadhyay

06 Jul 2002

ORDER

IN THE COURT OF THE PRESIDENT, DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM KENDUJHAR

C.D CASE NO.23/2000

Basanta Kumar Rout,

S/o- Sri Benudhar Rout,

At/P.O- Raisuan, P.S- Sadar,

Dist- Kendujhar

                                                                                                               ...         COMPLAINANT

                       Versus

1. Branch Manager, Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.

    At/P.O/P.S- Barbil, Dist- Keonjhar

 2. Divisional Manager, the Oriental Insurance Company Ltd.

     Gaffoor Colony, Uditnagar, Rourkela- 769012

 3. The Regional Manager,

     Regional office of the Oriental Insurance Company Ltd.

    At/P.O- Bhubaneswar, Dist- Khurda                                                 …       OPP. PARTIES 

For the complainant- Sri G.P. Mohapatra & P.K. Upadhyay

For the Op. No.1- Set-exparte

For the Op. No.2- Sri A.K. Pattnaik & M.K. Sutradhar

For the Op. No.3- Set-exparte                                                                                                                

Present- Sri B. Mishra, President

               Miss. P. Singh, Member

               Sri G.N. Jena, Member

Date of Hearing: 19.12.2001                                                                                                                                                          Date of Order: 6.7.2002

Sri B. Mishra, President:

(1)The brief facts of the case are that the complainant is the owner of the Car bearing registration no. OR-09A-3669 and the vehicle purchased from Bank Finance was insured with the Opp. Parties for the period from 5.9.98 to 4.9.99 on payment of the premium of Rs.6829/- and the Opp. Parties issued the Insurance policy bearing No. 345506/ 601/ 31/ 99/926 to the complainant on 4.9.98. The said Car met with an accident on 20.2.99 resulting substantial damage to the vehicle. After information, a surveyor was deputed for inspection by the Opp. Parties and after the inspection of the surveyor the complainant on the instruction of the Insurance company got the vehicle repaired and the complainant submitted the bills for such repair amounting to Rs.74,182/- to the Op No.1 in the claim form on 27.2.99. The complainant sent the required papers to the Opp. Parties for the settlement of the claim amount. But after long delay the surveyor deputed by the Opp. Parties one Sri Ashok Kumar Das, who is to make the final survey demanded illegal gratification and the complainant did not oblige him so he gave an adverse report to the Opp. Parties and this fact was immediately intimated to the Opp. Parties by the complainant. The complainant then long after on 27.3.2002 received a letter from the Opp. Parties that his claim is settled at Rs.20,000/-. So the complainant requested the Opp. Parties for resurvey but the Opp. Parties denied for the resurvey on 12.6.2000. The Opp. Parties have illegally reduced the claim amount without any reasons and are deficient in service causing mental, physical and financial loss to the complainant. Hence, the complaint for direction to the Opp. Parties to pay Rs.74,182/- for the loss of the vehicle and Rs.20,000/- for mental agony and Rs.2500/- for the costs of the litigation, with interest @ 18% per annum from 20.2.99 of the award amount till realization. In support of the contentions the complainant filed the original Certificate -cum- Policy schedule and the receipt granted by the Oriental Insurance Company of the payment of the premium by the complainant, which are marked as Ext.1 and Ext.2 respectively and also filed copies of the bills for the repair of the vehicle and the correspondences made by the complainant with insurance company.

(2) After due service of notice, the Op No.1 & Op No.3 remained absent and are set ex- parte on 9.2.2001 but the Op No.2 filed version on 9.2.2001. In version the Op No.2 stated that the complainant is not maintainable and the complainant has manipulated the bills and filed only to defraud the Insurance Company and also denied the allegations made against the surveyor A.K. Das but admitted the reassessment is made by A.P. Bisoy surveyor and loss assessor and also further denied the loss of Rs.74,182/- as the bill taken for estimate from one garage and the repair from other garages and further stated that the settlement of claim amounting to Rs.20,000/- is proper and justified. In sum the petition is not maintainable and the settlement of claim amounting to Rs.20,000/-  is justified. In support filed the survey reports which are marked as Ext. A & Ext. B.

(3) The fact admitted by the parties are that the vehicle of the complainant is Insured with the Opp. Parties and the vehicle met with an accident during the validity of the period covered under policy and the vehicle sustained damages due to the accident and the complainant submitted the bills of the repair charges amounting to Rs.74,182/- and the claim of Rs.74,182/- of the complainant is reduced by the Opp. Parties to Rs.20,000/-.

(4) In this back drop, the only point for considerations as agreed by the counsels for the respective parties is whether the reduction of the damage claim of Rs.74,182/- of the complainant to Rs.20,000/- by Opp. Parties is justified, if not, what relief the complainant is entitled to.

(5) From the above facts, we have heard the learned counsels for the respective parties and perused the records. From the material available on record it is evident that the complainant has raised serious doubt of the actions of the surveyor Sri A.K. Das deputed by the Opp. Parties and it is also evident from the report (Ext. B) submitted by the surveyor Sri A.P. Bisoy on resurvey/ assessment in which he specially mentioned that “Hence it appears that the insured has undertaken lot of repair which may be related to nominal wear and tear”. Moreover the insured should have given an opportunity to the final surveyor to inspect any damages that were not included in the estimate and further reported that the assessment of claim amount based on available documents. These very facts lead us to believe that the final survey has not been properly made before making full and final settlement and also it is evident that the surveyor who made the final assessment has not inspected the other parts of the bills not included in the estimate but, admitted that the insured had under taken a lot of repair. It is not disputed that the complainant has not filed the repaired bills for the claim amount but the Opp. Parties have doubted that the bills are manipulated and unable to produce any evidence in this regard to substantiate such a claim. On the whole we don’t find any reasons to disbelieve the contentions of the complainant and in our opinion the damages claim of Rs.74,182/- of the complainant is reasonable and the Opp. Parties are liable to pay the sum to the complainant.

(6) From these facts it is made clear that the Insurance Company has deliberately tried to delay the matter with some pretext or other and are not justified in reducing the claim and are deficient in service and such actions of the Opp. Parties obviously would have caused financial loss to the complainant, who has purchased the vehicle on financial assistance of the Bank, by not paying the claim amounts within a reasonable period and are liable for compensation to the complainant. But there is no material available on record for the assessment of actual loss of the complainant. But under the circumstances we feel an amount of Rs.20,000/- will be reasonable and adequate compensation to be paid by the Opp. Parties to the complainant.          

(7) So, we are in the opinion that the Opp. Parties are deficient in service and are liable to pay Rs.74,182/- towards the damage claim and Rs.20,000/- towards compensation in total Rs.94,182/- to the complainant.

Hence it is ordered that the Opp. Parties are directed to pay Rs.94,182/- to the complainant within one month of receipt of this order and after that the amount will carry interest @ 18% per annum till final payment.

   Orders pronounced in the open court today i.e. on 6^st day of July, 2002 under my hand and seal of this forum.

                            Copy of the order be made available to the parties as per rule.

 

           I agree                                                    I agree

      Sri G.N. Jena                                           Miss P. Singh                           Sri B. Mishra   

         Member                                                   Member                                 President

 

                                                                                      Dictated and Corrected by me.

                                                                                                     Sri B. Mishra   

                                                                                                        President

 

BEFORE THE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, ODISHA, CUTTACK

C.D. APPEAL No. 542 OF 2002

IN THE MATTER OF:

                            An Application U/s.15 of the C.P Act

                            AND

 IN THE MATTER OF:

1.           Branch Manager, Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.

                       At/P.O/P.S- Barbil, Dist- Keonjhar

        2.            Divisional Manager, the Oriental Insurance Company Ltd.

                       Gaffoor Colony, Uditnagar, Rourkela- 769012

        3.           The Regional Manager, Oriental Insurance Company Ltd.

                       Having its Regional Office at- Sahid Nagar, Bhubaneswar,

                       Represented by the duly constituted

                       Attorney of the Appellant No.3

                      All the Appellants are represented by the Appellant No.3                                                …        APPELLANTS

                                            Versus

                     Basanta Kumar Rout,

                     S/o- Sri Benudhar Rout,

                     At/P.O- Raisuan, P.S- Sadar,

                     Dist- Kendujhar                                                                                                                                ...         RESPONDENT

The matter out of which the present Appeal arises was never before this honorable commission.

C.D. APPEAL No. 542 OF 2002

          This record was placed today to hold National Level Lok Adalat.

Mr. Asim Kumar Pattnaik in the capacity of Manager, Oriental Insurance Company Limited is present on behalf of the appellants. The respondent is also present.

On persuasion of the commission, parties agreed that if a consolidated amount of Rs.50,000/- would be paid to the respondent the case can be compromised.

Accordingly, it is ordered that the appellants shall pay a consolidated amount of Rs.50,000/- to the respondent within four weeks hence:

         The Appeal is disposed of.

         Records received from the District Forum, Keonjhar be sent back forthwith.

                                                                                  

                                                                                                                                                                              Sd/- Justice R.N. Biswal, President

                                                                                                                                                                     Sd/- S. Mohanty, Member

                                                                                                                                                                       Sd/- G.P. Sahu, Member