STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA, PANCHKULA

First Appeal No  :      103 of 2015

Date of Institution:      29.01.2015

Date of Decision :       27.05.2015

National Insurance Company Limited, through its Branch Manager, Divisional Office Delhi, Rohtak Road, Bahadurgarh, District Jhajjar (Haryana), now through its authorized signatory of Regional Office, SCO No.337-340, Sector 35-B, Chandigarh.

                                      Appellant-Opposite Party

Versus

Main Pal s/o Sh. Uday Pal, Resident of House No.350, Madan Puri, Gurgaon, District Gurgaon (Haryana) Pin-122102 at present residing at Ward No.14, House No.644, Chhavani Jhajjar, Tehsil and District Jhajjar.

                                      Respondent-Complainant

CORAM:             Hon’ble Mr. Justice Nawab Singh, President.

                             Shri B.M. Bedi, Judicial Member.

                             Shri Diwan Singh Chauhan, Member                                                                                                                                         

Present:               Shri R.C. Gupta, Advocate for appellant.

                             Shri H.S. Gharoo, Advocate for respondent.

                                                   O R D E R

B.M. BEDI, JUDICIAL MEMBER

National Insurance Company Limited (for short ‘Insurance Company’)-Opposite Party, is in appeal against the order dated December 9^th, 2014, passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (for short ‘District Forum’), Jhajjar, whereby complaint filed by Main Pal-complainant (respondent herein) seeking compensation with respect to his insured car, which was burnt during the subsistence of the Insurance Policy, was accepted. For ready reference, the operative part of the order is as under:-

“…..it is directed that the respondent shall make the payment of a sum of Rs.3,60,000/- as IDV of vehicle in question as is clear from the policy placed on record as Ex. R-14 along with an interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of loss i.e. 5.9.2011 till realization of final payment to the complainant. The complainant is also entitled for a sum of Rs.2,000/- on account of litigation expenses for the present unwanted and unwarranted litigation only due to the deficiency in service on the part of the respondent. The complaint stands disposed of accordingly.”   

2.      Main Pal-complainant (respondent herein) got his car bearing registration No.HR-26-AG-1919, insured, with National Insurance Company Limited (for short ‘Insurance Company’)-Opposite Party, from December 6^th, 2010 to December 5^th, 2011 vide Insurance Policy Exhibit A-2. The Insured Declared Value (for short ‘IDV’) of the car was Rs.3,60,000/-.

3.      On September 5^th, 2011, the complainant was going in the above said car from Farrukh Nagar to his Village Fatehpur. When he reached near his village, the car caught fire and burnt. He informed the Police upon which Daily Diary Report No.16 (Exhibit A-1) was lodged in Police Post, Dulina, District Jhajjar on September 21^st, 2011. The Insurance Company was informed. The Insurance Company appointed Shri S.K. Chhillar, Surveyor , Loss Assessor and Investigator, who inspected the vehicle and submitted report Exhibit R-2.  The complainant filed claim with the Insurance Company but it did not pay the insured amount. He filed complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 before the District Forum.

4.      The Insurance Company-opposite party contested complaint by filing reply raising plea that the complainant failed to produce FSL report despite sending letters dated December 6^th, 2012 and January 17^th, 2013.

5.      On appraisal of the pleadings of the parties and the evidence available on the record, the District Forum vide impugned order accepted complaint and issued direction as detailed in paragraph No.1 of this order.

6.      The only argument raised by the learned counsel for the appellant-Insurance Company was that the District Forum has allowed the total claim of IDV without deducting the salvage value and excess clause of Rs.500/-. Thus, the order to this extent needs to be modified. The arguments appear plausible.

7.      In view of the above,  the Insurance Company is directed to pay Rs.3,60,000/- to the complainant after deducting the salvage value of Rs.15,000/- as assessed by the surveyor vide report dated May 13^th, 2012 (Exhibit R-18) and Rs.500/- as per excess clause contained in the policy terms. Rest of the impugned order is upheld.

8.      The impugned order is modified in the manner indicated above and the appeal stands disposed of.

9.      The statutory amount of Rs.25,000/- deposited at the time of filing the appeal be refunded to the respondent-complainant against proper receipt and identification in accordance with rules, after the expiry of period of appeal/revision, if any.

CL