Orissa

Jajapur

CC/108/2021

Satyabrata Mohanty. - Complainant(s)

Versus

Authorised Signatory/Legal Manager,Sri Ram General Insurance Co.Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Ramakanta ghadei

10 Dec 2021

ORDER

                IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, JAJPUR.

                                                        Present:    1.Sri Pitabas Mohanty, Member,

                                                                          2.Miss Smita Ray, Member.                       

                                                      Dated the 10th day of December ,2021.

                                                      C.C.Case No.108 of 2021

Satyabrata Mohanty , Prop-Maa Tarini Marbels

And Tiles   

Vill/P.O.  Debidwar, Jajpur town ,

 Dist.-Jajpur.                                                                                           …… ……....Complainant .                                                                       

                   (Versus)

1.Authorised Signatory,Legal Manager,Sriram General Insurance Co.Ltd    

 Plot No.2863/3719,Gitanjali complex,Luis Road,BBSR  

2. Authorised Signatory Sriram General Insurance Co.Ltd, At.Chorda By pass

 Jajpur Road,Dt. Jajpur

3.Authorised Signatory,Sriram General Insurance Co.Ltd, E-8,EPIP-Rly

 Co.Industrical area,Sitapur,Jaypur,Rajstan.

4.Authorised Signatory, Aditya Motors, At/P.O/Panikoili

  Dt. Jajpur.

                                                                                                               ……………..Opp.Parties.                                                                                                                                            For the Complainant:                                    Sri  R.K.Ghadei, S.K.Samal,  Advocates.

For the Opp.Party: No.1,2 and 3                    Mr A.K.Dash,   Advocate.

For the Opp.Party : No.4                                None.                                                                                            

                                                                                                    Date of order:  10.12.2021

MISS  SMITA  RAY,  MEMBER (w) .                                                  

The petitioner has filed the present dispute against the O.Ps  alleging deficiency in service due to non-settlement of Insurance claim as against his accident vehicle bearing No.OD-34-G-3314.

            The facts as stated by the petitioner in the complaint petition shortly are that the petitioner being an unemployed youth to maintain his livelihood by means of self employment had opened a marble & Tiles shop in the style of M/S Maa Tarini Marbel & Tiles where in the petitioner is a proprietor. For transporting the marble & Tiles the petitioner also had purchased a Bolero pick up van bearing Regd.No.OD-34-G-3314. In due course of time while the above cited vehicle was playing from Jajpur Town to Jajpur Road on 08.04.21 dashed with Pramod kumar Sahu who was selling Dahibara at Sathipur Chhak covering the road and in the result Pramod kumar Sahu injured and subsequently died. Accordingly the petitioner lodged insurance claim to the O.Ps except O.P.no.4 on 08.04.21 vide  claim case No.10000/31/22/N/000 2744 as against the policy No.331013/31/21/000/28 for settlement of Insurance claim against the above accident vehicle since not only the accident vehicle was insured with the Insurance company   having the validity period 01.07.20 to 30.06.21 but also the driver Umakanta Jena who was driving the accident vehicle was possessing valid driving license. In addition to it was the brother in law of the deceased lodged the F.I.R in the Panikoili P.S vide P.S case No. 117 dt 8/4/21 the investating officer after investigation submitted charge sheet against the driver in the J.M.F.C court vide CMC No.79/2021. Thereafter the petitioner shifted the accident vehicle from the spot to O.p.no.4 for repair as per letter of O.p.no.1 dt.14.04.21. The O.P.no.4 after repairmen though submitted the bill of repairtment charges of the accident vehicle  amounting to Rs.2,34,000/- to the Insurance company but due to non settlement of Insurance claim the petitioner released the alleged vehicle from the custody  of O.P.no.4 by borrowing money from his relatives and the said repairmen cost has been paid by the petitioner to O.p.no.4  vide cheque No.046841,046795,046798 as well as filed a dispute  against the Insurance company in this commission for redressal of his grievance with the prayer to direct O.p.no.1 ,2 and 3 to pay the insurance claim  against the accident vehicle  as well as award compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- and cost of litigation expenses amounting to Rs.20,000/-.

            After receipt of the notice the O.Ps after appearance  filed the written version taking the stand that though the alleged above cited vehicle has been insured with the o.ps  but after receipt of the claim form and repairmet  cost of Aditya Motors (O.P.no.4)  this O.P party appointed IRDA surveyor Mr Susanta ku.Mohapatra to conduct the necessary survey of the alleged loss. The surveyor after necessary survey submitted the assessed loss amounting to Rs.1,36,000/-  considering all relevant factors. After receipt of the survey report the O.P party  after maintaining all official formalities settled the Insurance claim of the petitioner amounting to Rs.1,30,000/-  and the said claim amount has already been paid to the petitioner .Hence the dispute is liable to be dismissed since there is no deficiency in service on the part of O.ps.

            In view of the above assertion and counter assertions we are inclined to dispose of the present dispute as per our observation below:-

Admittedly the above cited vehicle has been insured with the O.P and during subsistence of policy the said vehicle met with the accident. After receipt of the claim form the insurance company appointed surveyor  who after survey assessed the loss amounting to Rs.1,36,000/- and basing on which the Insurance company has paid Rs.1,30,000/- to the petitioner towards settlement of Insurance claim as against the repairmen cost of Rs.2,34,743/-. In this context we have come across with the observation of Hon’ble National Commission reported in 2021(1)CPR-192-NC(North India     Ltd Vs M/S United India Insurance to and 2013(2) CLT-395-Chandigarh( Punjab) Bhupinder Singh Vrs National Insurance Company wherein it is held that “

            “The surveyor is required to supply the survey report”

so as to give his clarification in respect of the survey conducted by the surveyor. The Hon’ble National Commission is also in the opinion that copy of surveyor’s  report  mandatory as to be provided to Insured ( Vide C.C.No.83/08 reported in 2021(1) CPR-192-N.C) But in the present case as observed the Insurance company without following the proper procedure of law partially has settled the Insurance claim of the petitioner amounting  to Rs.1,30,000/- as against the repairmen cost of Rs.2,34,743/-  basing on the survey report since surveyor’s bread comes from the Insurance company  as per observation of National Commission reported in 1992(2)CPJ-121-N.C. As such the surveyor’s report is not binding either to insurer or insured in view of the observation of Hon’ble Supreme court reported in 2010(1)CLT-266-SC. More over the Insurance company (O.P) has paid the Insurance claim amounting to Rs.1,30,000/- during pendency of the dispute, for which the O.P is liable to pay interest in view of the observation of Hon’ble National Commission observation reported in III(2005) CPJ-30-N.C,

            The above observations from our side clearly go to establish the Inurance company has not settled the Insurance claim of the petitioner as per law for which the law is consequently in petitoner’s favour accordingly  the dispute is allowed.                       

                                                      O R D E R

            The dispute is allowed against the O.p.no.1 ,2 and 3 .The O.P.no.1,2 and 3 are directed to pay the Insurance claim of the petitioner amounting to Rs.2,34,743/- out of which the O.P will deduct Rs.4822/ towards salvage charges .As regards compensation we assess the same Rs.20,000/- as compensation and cost of litigation expenses amounting to Rs.10,000/- which shall be paid by the O.Ps ( Insurance company)  within 45 days from the date of receipt of this order, failing which the awarded amount will carry 9% interest per annum from the date of filing of the dispute till its realization.                                                                                           

                    This order is pronounced in the open commission on this the 10th day of  December,2021. under my hand and seal of the Commission .