Complaint filed on: 04-12-2009<br /> Disposed on: 06-07-2010<br /> <br /> BEFORE THE BANGALORE IV ADDITIONAL DISTRICT <br /> CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,<br /> BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT, NO.8, SAHAKARA BHAVAN, CUNNINGHAM ROAD, BANGALORE – 560 052 <br /> <br /> C.C.No.2858/2009<br /> DATED THIS THE 6th JULY 2010<br /> <br /> PRESENT<br /> <br /> SRI.D.KRISHNAPPA., PRESIDENT<br /> <br /> SRI.GANGANARASAIAH., MEMBER<br /> <br /> SMT. ANITA SHIVAKUMAR. K, MEMBER<br /> <br /> <br /> Complainant: - Mr.Panjak Poddar <br /> S/o. Prabhu Dayal Poddar<br /> Aged about 41 years,<br /> R/at C/o. Sri Poddar iron Store,<br /> No.45/2, Hebbagodi, <br /> Hosur Road, Bangalore-560 100 <br /> <br /> V/s<br /> <br /> Opposite party: - M/s. The New India Assurance <br /> Company Limited, 1st Floor,<br /> KIADB complex, Hosur Road,<br /> Bommasandra, Bangalore-99 <br /> Represented by its Branch <br /> Manager <br /> <br /> <br /> O R D E R<br /> <br /> <br /> SRI. D.KRISHNAPPA., PRESIDENT., <br /> <br /> The grievance of the complainant against Opposite party [hereinafter called as Op for short) in brief is that, he is the owner of the lorry described in the complaint which was insured with the OP, was in effect from 9-7-2007 to 8-7-2008. The lorry which was parked in front of his shop was stolen away then he gave a complaint to the concerned police, which was registered as a crime. That he on 23-4-2008 made a claim with the OP and claiming insurance amount. OP then deputed one Abdul Sattar to ascertain about theft, that Abdul Sattar demanded certain documents to enable them to process the claim. Then he after receipt of that letter duly filled claim form with entire documents was given to the OP who has issued endorsement on receipt of documents dated 18-12-2008. OP after receipt of documents, through its letter dated 23-4-2008 demanded further documents then he also furnished those required documents. Thereafter also when his claim was not settled, he approached the OP then on request of OP, he gave a consent letter accepting compensation of Rs.4 lakhs on 9-1-2009. That despite issue several demands and reminders, OP through his letter dated 12-3-2009 replied that they have sent the file to divisional office to obtain sanction. Thereafter he wrote several letters demanding payment and also interest at the rate of 12% per annum for delayed payment. But the OP only on 14-10-2009 paid a sum of Rs.3,94,000/- deducting Rs.6,000/- but he has refused to pay interest and therefore has prayed for a direction to OP to pay interest on Rs.4 lakhs from 29-12-2008 till 14-10-2009. <br /> <br /> 2. OP has appeared through his advocate and has filed version, admitting issue of policy covering the lorry of the complainant and without disputing the policy validity period has stated, that on alleged by the complainant there is no delay caused from them and the delay in processing the claim of the complainant is attributed to the complainant and stated to have intimated the complainant that they are not liable to be pay interest and have further contended that the claim of the complainant since exceeded their limits they had sent the file to the divisional office for approval and after obtaining approval payment is made and denying any deficiency has submitted for dismissal of the complaint. <br /> <br /> 3. In the course of enquiry into the complaint, the complainant and the manger of the OP have filed their affidavit evidence reproducing what they have stated in this respective complaint and version. The complainant alongwith the complaint has produced copies of complaint he had given to the police intimating theft, copy of the indemnity bond and copy of letter sent to OP, demanding payment of interest. OP has also produced a copy of policy and copies of certain correspondences. We have heard the counsel for both the parties and perused the records. <br /> <br /> 4. On the above contentions following points for determination arise.<br /> 1. Whether the complainant proves that OP has caused inordinate delay in paying insurance amount therefore he is entitled for interest?<br /> 2. To what reliefs, the complainant is entitled to?<br /> 5. Our findings are as under:<br /> 1. Answer Point No.1: In the affirmative <br /> 2. Answer Point No.2: To see the final order.<br /> <br /> REASONS<br /> 6. Answer on Point No.1: As stated above the facts that, the complainant had insured his lorry with OP, that lorry was stolen on 17-4-2008, as on that day, the insurance policy was inforce, that the complainant had followed all the prescribed procedure given a complaint to the police and intimation to OP are not in dispute. The dispute between the parties is with regard to the alleged delay in settling the complainant claim and nonpayment of interest on the amount due for the delayed period.<br /> <br /> 7. The complainant has stated that, he submitted claim form to OP on 23-4-2008 and given all the relevant documents to OP for processing including C-final report of the concerned police. He has further stated that on 23-12-2008, OP demanded further certain documents which were already furnished and on the request of OP he also got RC book transferred in the name of OP. OP has not denied any of these facts. The complainant has further stated that on the request of OP he had given consent letter on 9-1-2009 agreeing to accept Rs.4 lakhs towards compensation. Then on 7-5-2009 on the request of OP, he produced B-extract of registration certificate and final report from the court for accepting of C-report. Then stated after complying all the requests of OP he sent another letter dated 10-9-2009 demanding the OP to pay him Rs.4 lakhs with interest and stated that all these demands made from time to time the OP paid him Rs.3,95,000/- on 14-10-2009. The complainant has produced copies of all his letters and letter of subrogation, letter of indemnity which are sufficient to prove that on 18-12-2008 the complainant complied all the requirements of OP and hade even executed an indemnity bond for Rs.4 lakhs and it is also not in dispute that OP thereafter did not demand any documents from the complainant. Then we see another letter dated 12-3-2009 reminding OP to reimburse the loss for which OP on 28-8-09 sent a reply stating that they have forward the file to the division officer for approval. Thereafter when the complainant did not receive any communication from OP demanded to pay the compensation with interest. But OP woke up and reimbursed the complainant on 14-10-2009. OP has contended that there is no delay on their part and delay is only because of the complainant, has not substantiated it. OP has also not come forward to explain as to why the file which was sent to the divisional office for approval on 20-3-2009 held up there till 14-10-2009. This delay of about 7 months in the divisional office is un-explained and we do not think that the divisional office require so much time for giving approval on recommendation which was fully processed and forward by OP. Therefore when OP has not come forward to explain delay can not blame the complainant for it and further cannot take a stand that they are not liable to be pay interest during processing period. We too agree that OP is not liable to pay interest during processing period of claim, provided that it is reasonable one and is explained satisfactorily. But OP since has not convinced this forum about this unreasonable and inordinate un-explanation delay is liable to pay interest.<br /> <br /> 8. The complainant is also reasonable in claiming interest from 29-9-2008 till 14-10-2008, we found, when the complainant accepted the offers Rs.4 lakhs and even executed letter of indemnity by that time nothing was required to be done by the complainant. Thereafter delay is on the part of OP as such, we find that, OP is liable to be pay interest from 1-1-2009 till 13-10-009 with the result, we answer Point No-1 in the affirmative and pass the following order.<br /> <br /> O R D E R<br /> <br /> Complaint is allowed in part. OP is directed to pay interest at 9% per annum on Rs.3,94,000/- from 1-1-2009 till 13-10-2009 and OP shall pay that amount within 45 days from the date of this order. Failing which, he shall pay damages of Rs.2000/- per month from the date of this order till that amount is repaid. <br /> OP shall also pay cost of Rs.2000/- to the complainant. <br /> <br /> Dictated to the Stenographer, got it transcribed and corrected, pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 6th July 2010.<br /> <br /> <br /> MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />