Haryana

StateCommission

A/1013/2015

SATYAWAN - Complainant(s)

Versus

NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. - Opp.Party(s)

ARJUN SHEORAN

22 Jul 2016

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA, PANCHKULA

                                                 

First Appeal No  :     1013 of 2015

Date of Institution:       27.11.2015

Date of Decision :       22.07.2016

 

Satyawan s/o Sh. Raghubir Singh, Resident of Ward No.13, Meham, District Rohtak, Haryana.

                                      Appellant/Complainant

Versus

1.      National Insurance Company Limited, Division Office No.1, Outer Quila Road, Rohtak, through its Divisional Manager.

2.      Hyundai Showroom, Bahadurgarh, through its Manager.

3.      Sristi Hyundai Showroom, Sukhapura Chowk, Rohtak, Haryana.

                                      Respondents/Opposite Parties

 

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

                             Mr. B.M. Bedi, Judicial Member.

 

Present:               None for appellant.

                             Shri B.S. Taunque, Advocate for respondents. 

 

                                                   O R D E R

NAWAB SINGH J.(ORAL)

 

        This complainant’s appeal is directed against the order dated October 29^th, 2015, passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Rohtak (for short ‘the District Forum’), whereby complaint filed by him was dismissed.

2.                Satyawan-complainant/appellant, got his car (Santro) bearing registration No.HR-15B-2666, insured with National Insurance Company Limited (for short ‘the Insurance Company’) for the period May 31^st, 2012 to May 30^th, 2013, vide Insurance Policy Exhibit C-4. The Insured Declared Value (IDV) of the car was Rs.3,88,969/-. The car met with an accident on September 17^th, 2012 and was damaged. Daily Diary Report No.35-B (Exhibit C-5) was lodged in Police Station Maurya Enclave, Delhi. On being informed, the Insurance Company appointed surveyor. The surveyor inspected the car and submitted report Exhibit R-3. The Insurance Company settled the claim of the complainant at Rs.1,95,000/-. The complainant preferred to retain the salvage and received the amount of Rs.1,95,000/- in full and final settlement of his claim. He executed consent letter (Exhibit R-4) and Discharge Voucher (Exhibit C-7).

3.                After accepting the aforesaid amount of Rs.1,95,000/- in full and final settlement of his claim, the complainant filed complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 averring that his car was totally damaged and he was entitled to the IDV, that is, Rs.3,88,969/-.       

4.                The question for consideration is whether the complainant had received the amount of Rs.1,95,000/- in full and final settlement of his claim or not?

5.                Indisputably, the complainant has received the amount of Rs.1,95,000/- from the Insurance Company in full and final settlement of his claim.  He signed the consent letter (Exhibit R-4) and Discharge Voucher (Exhibit C-7).

6.                It was not the case of the complainant that execution of the aforesaid Consent Letter and Discharge Voucher was obtained by the Insurance Company under fraud, undue influence, misrepresentation etc.  So, he could not be allowed to reopen his claim.

7.                In National Insurance Co. Vs. Boghara Polyfab Pvt. Ltd.(2009) 1 SCC 267, Hon’ble Supreme Court held as under:-

“25.   Where one of the parties to the contract issues a full and final discharge voucher (or no-dues certificate, as the case may be) confirming that he has received the payment in full and final satisfaction of all claims, and he has no outstanding claim, that amounts to discharge of the contract by acceptance of performance and the party issuing the discharge voucher/certificate cannot thereafter make any fresh claim or revive any settled claim nor can it seek reference to arbitration in respect of any claim.”

8.                In Aradhna Fabrics Pvt. Ltd., Through Sh. Ashok Avasthi, Managing Director Versus United India Insurance Co. Ltd. & Anr., 2015 (2) CPR 482 (NC), Hon’ble National Commission after relying upon a judgment titled New India Assurance Co. Ltd. vs. Genus Power Infrastructure Ltd, 2015 AIR SCW 67 of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, dismissed the complaint on the ground that complainant had accepted the payment in full and final settlement of it’s claim.

9.               In the instant case no evidence has been produced by the complainant to show that there was misrepresentation, fraud or coercion on the part of the Insurance Company in paying the amount of Rs.1,95,000/-, rather, the same was received by him with free consent.

10.              In view of the above, no case for interference in the impugned order is made out.

11.            The appeal consequently fails and is hereby dismissed.

 

Announced: 22.07.2016

(B.M. Bedi) Judicial Member

(Nawab Singh) President

 

CL