Oral

State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission

U.P. Lucknow.

Appeal No. 229 of 2005

Branch Manager, National Insurance Company

Ltd., Branch Office, Ist Shadi Building,

Cinema Road, Gorakhpur.                                 …Appellant.

Versus

Ajit Singh s/o Ramjee Singh, R/o House

no.28-D, Mahewa Kustkim, Post Sadar,

Police Station, Rajghat, District, Gorakhpur.   …Respondent.

and

Appeal No. 1913 of 2004

Ajit Singh s/o Sri Ramjee Singh, R/o House

no.28-D, Mahewa Mustkim, Post Sadar,

District, Gorakhpur.                                             …Appellant.

Versus

National Insurance Company Ltd., Branch

Office, Ist Shadi Building, Cinema Road,

Gorakhpur through Branch Manager.             .…Respondent.

Present:-

1- Hon’ble Sri Sushil Kumar, Presiding Member.

2- Hon’ble Smt. Sudha Upadhyay, Member.

Sri Deepak Mehrotra, Advocate for appellant/Insurance Co.

Sri R.K.Gupta, Advocate for respondent/Complainant.

Date   20.9.2024

JUDGMENT

Per Sri Sushil Kumar, Presiding Member- The above appeals are connected with each other arising out from one and the same judgment and order, hence these appeals are being decided together.

          The appeal no.229 of 2005 has been filed by the appellant National Insurance Company Ltd. for setting aside the judgment and order dated 27.8.2004 passed by the Ld. District Commission, Gorakhpur in complaint case no.152 of 2002.

The appeal no.1913 of 2016 has been filed by the respondent/complainant Sri Ajit Singh for enhancement of the amount of compensation alongwith interest @ 18%.

As per the record the insurance company has already paid Rs.5,40,000.00 to the Telco Hire Purchase Corporation, the loan providing company to the complainant. Therefore, there is no need to elaborate the discussions regarding issuance of policy and submission of claim.

   Ld. counsel for the appellant Insurance Company submitted that since the amount of Rs.5,40,000.00 was paid in full and final settlement, therefore, there was no occasion to file consumer complaint after  getting the amount but there is no record which may show that the complainant executed any discharge voucher in favour of the insurance company. Hence, this argument is not tenable that the payment of Rs.5,40,000.00 was made towards full and final settlement of  the claim on 31.10.2002.

As per the report prepared by the surveyor Sri P.K. Agarwal the total loss was considered Rs.5,40,000.00 only and this amount was paid to the complainant while the ld. District Consumer Forum considered the report of surveyor Rakesh Agarwal Associates  who valued the loss to Rs.7,29,300.00 but it was second report of the surveyor while the first report was no refused or declined by the insurance company. There was no occasion to appoint second surveyor. Therefore, the report of second surveyor is not admissible in law. The first report prepared by the surveyor Sri P.K. Agarwal is admissible who assessed the loss amounting to Rs.5,40,000.00 which was paid by the insurance company.

As per the discussions above, the order passed by the ld. District Consumer Commission, extra payment of Rs.79,000.00 to the complainant is illegal. Since this order is illegal and no amount is payable to the complainant therefore, the appeal no.1913 of 2004 filed by the complainant deserves to be dismissed.

Appeal no.229 of 2005 filed by the National Insurance Company Ltd. is allowed and the judgment and order passed by the ld. District Consumer Commission regarding payment of Rs.79,000.00 is set aside.    

ORDER

The appeal no.229 of 2005 is allowed and the judgment and order dated 27.8.2004 passed by the Ld. District Commission, Gorakhpur in complaint case no.152 of 2002 is set aside.   

The appeal no.1913 of 2004 is dismissed.  

A certified copy of this order be placed on the record of appeal no. 1913 of 2004.

If any amount is deposited by the appellant/Insurance Company at the time of filing of this appeal under section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, may be return to the appellant/insurance company, as per rules alongwith accrued interest upto date.

The stenographer is requested to upload this order on the Website of this Commission today itself. 

          Certified copy of this judgment be provided to the parties as per rules.        

          (Sudha Upadhyay)                          (Sushil Kumar)                             

                Member                                   Presiding Member

Jafri, PA I

Court 2