Jharkhand

Bokaro

CC/11/2021

Banshi Modak - Complainant(s)

Versus

National Insurance Company Limited - Opp.Party(s)

Swarn Singh

29 Apr 2023

ORDER

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bokaro

Date of Filing-10-03-2021

Date of final hearing-29-04-2023

 Date of Order-29-04-2023

Case No. 11/2021

Banshi Modak S/o Late Avinash Moadak,

 R/o Purulia Road, Chas, P.O & P.S. Chas, District- Bokaro, 827013

Vs.

1. M/s National Insurance Company Limited

through Divisional Manager, Divisional Office,

C-27, 1^st Floor, Sheela Sadan, City Centre, Sector-4,

Bokaro Steel City, District Bokaro 827004

2. Sr. Branch Manager, National Insurance Company Limited,

Chas Branch, Check Post, Chas, P.O. Chas, District- Bokaro, 827013

 

Present:-

                             Shri Jai Prakash Narayan Pandey, President

                  Smt. Baby Kumari, Member

PER- J.P.N Pandey, President

-:Order:-

1. Complainant’s case in brief is that he is owner of Truck bearing registration No. JH-09-M-2576 which was insured with O.P. M/s National Insurance Co. Ltd. vide policy No. 180501311910008232 valid from 27.12.2019 to 26.12.2020 meanwhile said vehicle met with an accident on 05.11.2020 and got damaged substantially for which SDE No. 128 dt. 06.11.2020 was registered. Complainant reported the matter to the O.P. with estimated cost of repair Rs. 4,59,350/-. Further case is that after inspection of by the surveyor of the company the truck was repaired in which total Rs. 5,23,400.50 was paid but insurance claim was not settled then legal noticed dt. 03.02.2021 was issued which was replied by the O.P. As per reply of the O.P. of legal notice surveyor has assessed the damage to the tune of Rs. 1,67,475/- only who was demanding illegal gratification from the complainant to assess the actual loss but it was not paid hence surveyor has submitted its report without actual verification. As per reply of legal notice by the O.P. complainant had agreed to settle the claim on Rs. 1,24,731/- which is wrong rather correct fact is that on 22.01.2021 complainant visited the office of the O.P. where he was advised to put his signature for expeditious disposal of the matter accordingly he signed the paper but he never agreed on above amount. Further case is that earlier it was alleged by the O.P. that truck was over loaded  but later on it has been cleared that it was under permissible load. Further reply is that on 08.02.2021 Rs. 1,24,731/- has been transferred by the O.P. in the account of the complainant through NEFT but complainant never agreed for it. Further case is that inspite of repeated requests when matter was not settled then this case has been filed with prayer to direct the O.P. to pay Rs. 5,23,400/- repair cost, Rs. 50,000/- as compensation and Rs. 10,000/- as litigation cost.
2. As per W.S. of the O.P. matter has already been settled accordingly payment of Rs. 1,24,731/- has been made to the complainant because as per assessment claim amount was Rs. 1,68,975/- hence 25% of the amount was deducted and rest of the amount has been paid. Further reply is that complainant does not  come within purview of the Consumer who is owner of several other vehicles. Further reply is that in view of acceptance of the remitted amount by the complainant he is not entitled to get any more amount. Further reply is that gross vehicle weight was amended on the prayer of the complainant which was less earlier. Further reply is that complainant has not furnished desired information/papers and his case is liable to be dismissed.
3. Point for consideration is that whether complainant is entitled to get relief as prayed ?
4. As per complainant he has paid total Rs. 5,23,400/- including the repair charge, freight charge etc. but as per surveyor’s report IDV value of the vehicle is Rs. 4,83,000/- and total estimated cost of the repair including the cost of spare parts, labour charge etc. is Rs. 4,59,350/- only. As per surveyor’s report there will be 50% payment of metallic and non metallic items because of the age of the vehicle hence after considering the depreciation value of 50% and deduction of salvage value and other charges actual payable amount is Rs. 1,67,475/- only. On perusal of the record it appears that it is not disclosing any material or evidence to disbelieve the report of the surveyor. Therefore, we are of the view that surveyor’s report is the basis for assessment of the loss in this case. In our opinion there is no any reason to discard the surveyor’s report, contrary to it there is no any other evidence on record. It is admitted fact that vehicle concerned was manufactured in the month of Jan. 2010 and it has been registered in the DTO office on 18.01.2010. In this way vehicle concerned was 10 years old at the time of accident, hence as per norms of the insurance policy there shall be depreciation of the vehicle concerned as well as its parts. It is important to note here that on the ground that there was overloading on the vehicle concerned 25% of the assessed loss has been curtailed by the O.P. but later on O.P. himself has corrected the policy and realized that vehicle concerned was not being run with overload, hence it appears that curtailment of 25% of the loss is not justifiable. Therefore, we are of the opinion that prayer of the complainant is liable to be partly allowed to the extent as it is admissible as per insurance policy. In this way it is apparent that total payable amount to the complainant by the O.P. was Rs. 1,67,475/- amongst which Rs. 1,24,731/- has already been paid hence only Rs. 42,744/- is to be paid to the complainant for which he is entitled to get relief.  Accordingly this point is being decided in favour of the complainant.
5. Accordingly prayer of the complainant is being partly allowed in the following manner:-

O.P. National Insurance Co. Ltd. is directed to pay Rs. 42,744/- only (Rs. 1,67,474/- (assessed loss) minus Rs. 1,24,731/- (already paid on 08.02.2021 through NEFT to the complainant) = 42,744/-) within 60 days from receipt/production of the copy of this order, failing which O.P. will pay interest @ 10% per annum on that very amount from 10.03.2021 (i.e. the date on which case was filed). Further O.P. is directed to pay compensation of Rs. 5000/- and litigation cost Rs. 3000/- to the complainant within above noted period.

(J.P.N. Pandey)

                                                                                      President

 

                  

                                                                               (Baby Kumari)

                                                                                       Member