Order No. 13 dt. 07/02/2020
The case of the complainant in brief is that the complainant is a company engaged in a business of trading of oils. The complainant purchased from o.p. no.1 Marine Cargo Policy bearing policy no. 31140021/2015/2021 for its voyage through road from anywhere in India for all types of edible oil through tankers for a sum of Rs.20,00,000/- and the limit per location was Rs.40,00,000/-. The said policy was effective from 20/10/2014 to midnight of 18/10/2015. On 09/03/2015 one of the tankers being tanker no. WB-39A-4254 was carrying 19960 Mt. of RBD Palm Oil amounting to Rs.11,04,687/- belonging to the complainant left from the factory of JBL Agro at Haldia for delivery to the consignee’s premises at Coochbeher. On its way the said tanker on 16/03/2015 at about 4-45 A.M. met with an accident near railway crossing in between Jalpaiguri and Raninagar level crossing. As a result of the aforesaid accident the vehicle carrying the oil overturned and the oil within the tanker completely leaked out, thereby resulting into loss of Rs.11,04,687/-. The complainant informed the said fact to o.ps and lodged a claim. The o.ps engaged surveyor who submitted the report after assessing the financial loss of the complainant of a sum of Rs.10,72,863/- and opined that the complainant will be compensated for the said loss. The o.ps sat tight over the matter and released the amount after expiry of two years on or about 17/07/2017 by transferring an amount of Rs.10,82,474/- to the bank account of the complainant. Since the complainant was not paid the money within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of surveyor’s report, the complainant claimed interest over the said sum @2% above the bank rate as per Clause 15.10 of the regulation. On the basis of the said fact the complainant filed this case praying for direction upon the o.ps for releasing further amount of Rs.3,02,538/- as well as compensation and litigation cost.
The o.p.s contested the case by filing w/v and denied all the material allegations of the complaint. It was stated that after receiving the claim form regarding loss of the complainant o.p. insurance company appointed surveyor and surveyor submitted the report on 14/04/2015. From the survey report it is clear that the loss suffered by the complainant was Rs.10,72,863.60 and thereafter insurance company started the process to settle the claim and accordingly, insurance company paid Rs.10,82,474/- to the complainant towards the settlement of the claim of the complainant. The complainant with free consent signed discharge voucher without raising any objection and did not claim any further amount towards the settlement of claim from the insurance company. On the other hand, in the signed discharge voucher it is clearly written that "in consideration of approval of my/our/I/we hereby accept from the Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. the sum of Rs.10,82,474/- in full and final settlement of my/our claim for the loss which occurred on 09/03/2015 covered under the policy……….. I/we hereby voluntarily give discharge receipt to the company in full and final settlement of all my/our claims present or future arising directly/indirectly in respect of the said loss/accident. I/we hereby also subrogate all my/our rights and remedies to the company in respect of the above loss / damages Rs.10,82,474/-". In the said discharge voucher the complainant did not write the words “without prejudice” or “with objection”. Hence the complainant is not in a position to raise any further claim after receiving the amount towards full and final settlement. The o.ps categorically stated that as the complainant signed the discharge voucher without raising any objection, therefore, the claim made by the complainant for further amount cannot be entertained. On the basis of the said fact o.ps prayed for dismissal of the case.
On the basis of the pleadings of the respective parties following points are to be decided :-
- Whether the complainant after receiving the amount can claim for further amount towards interest and compensation?
- Whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of the o.ps.?
- Whether the complainant will be entitled to get the relief as prayed for?
Decision with reasons :-
All the points are taken up together for the sake of brevity and avoidance of repetition of facts.
Ld. Lawyer for the complainant argued that the complainant is a company engaged in a business of trading of oils. The complainant purchased from o.p. no.1 Marine Cargo Policy bearing policy no. 31140021/2015/2021 for its voyage through road from anywhere in India for all types of edible oil through tankers for a sum of Rs.20,00,000/- and the limit per location was Rs.40,00,000/-. The said policy was effective from 20/10/2014 to midnight of 18/10/2015. On 09/03/2015 one of the tankers being tanker no. WB-39A-4254 was carrying 19960 Mt. of RBD Palm Oil amounting to Rs.11,04,687/- belonging to the complainant left from the factory of JBL Agro at Haldia for delivery to the consignee’s premises at Coochbeher. On its way the said tanker on 16/03/2015 at about 4-45 A.M. met with an accident near railway crossing in between Jalpaiguri and Raninagar level crossing. As a result of the aforesaid accident the vehicle carrying the oil overturned and the oil within the tanker completely leaked out, thereby resulting into loss of Rs.11,04,687/-. The complainant informed the said fact to o.ps and lodged a claim. The o.ps engaged surveyor who submitted the report after assessing the financial loss of the complainant of a sum of Rs.10,72,863/- and opined that the complainant will be compensated for the said loss. The o.ps sat tight over the matter and released the amount after expiry of two years on or about 17/07/2017 by transferring an amount of Rs.10,82,474/- to the bank account of the complainant. Since the complainant was not paid the money within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of surveyor’s report, the complainant claimed interest over the said sum @2% above the bank rate as per Clause 15.10 of the regulation. On the basis of the said fact the complainant filed this case praying for direction upon the o.ps for releasing further amount of Rs.3,02,538/- as well as compensation and litigation cost.
Ld. Lawyer for the complainant in support of his contention relied on Clause 15 of the Notification of IRDA and highlighted claim procedure in respect of a general insurance policy. In 15(3) of the Regulation it has been categorically stated that the surveyor shall start the survey immediately unless there is a contingency that delays immediate survey……… interim report of the physical details of the loss to be recorded and forwarded to the insurer within the shortest time but not later than 15 days. In 15(8) of the Notification it has been stated that on receipt of the final survey report or the additional survey report as the case may be and on receipt of all required information and documents that are relevant and necessary for the claim and insurer shall within a period of 30 days offer a settlement of the claim. In the event of the claim is not settled the insurer shall be liable to pay interest at a rate which is 2% above the bank rate from the date of receipt of last relevant and necessary documents from the insured/claimant by insurer till the date of actual payment. On the basis of the said fact Ld. Lawyer for the complainant has claimed the interest and compensation. Ld. Lawyer for complainant has also cited a judgment as decided by Hon’ble National Commission being R.P. No.555/2015. On the basis of the said fact Ld. Lawyer for the complainant emphasized the claim as made out against the o.ps.
Ld. Lawyer for the o.ps. argued that after receiving the claim form regarding loss of the complainant o.p. insurance company appointed surveyor and surveyor submitted the report on 14/04/2015. From the survey report it is clear that the loss suffered by the complainant was Rs.10,72,863.60 and thereafter insurance company started the process to settle the claim and accordingly, insurance company paid Rs.10,82,474/- to the complainant towards the settlement of the claim of the complainant. The complainant with free consent signed discharge voucher without raising any objection and did not claim any further amount towards the settlement of claim from the insurance company. On the other hand, in the signed discharge voucher it is clearly written that "in consideration of approval of my/our/I/we hereby accept from the Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. the sum of Rs.10,82,474/- in full and final settlement of my/our claim for the loss which occurred on 09/03/2015 covered under the policy……….. I/we hereby voluntarily give discharge receipt to the company in full and final settlement of all my/our claims present or future arising directly/indirectly in respect of the said loss/accident. I/we hereby also subrogate all my/our rights and remedies to the company in respect of the above loss / damages Rs.10,82,474/-". In the said discharge voucher the complainant did not write the words “without prejudice” or “with objection”. Hence the complainant is not in a position to raise any further claim after receiving the amount towards full and final settlement. The o.ps categorically stated that as the complainant signed the discharge voucher without raising any objection, therefore, the claim made by the complainant for further amount cannot be entertained. On the basis of the said fact o.ps prayed for dismissal of the case.
Ld. Lawyer for the o.ps. emphasized that whenever the complainant has voluntarily put the signature on the discharge receipt and whereby it was categorically stated that I/we hereby voluntarily give discharge receipt to the company in full and final settlement of all my/our claims present or future arising directly/indirectly in respect of the said loss/accident. I/we hereby also subrogate all my/our rights and remedies to the company in respect of the above loss / damages Rs.10,82,474/-". In the said discharge voucher the complainant did not write the words “without prejudice” or “with objection”. Hence the complainant is not in a position to raise any further claim after receiving the amount towards full and final settlement. Ld. Lawyer for the o.ps in respect of their contention cited a judgment as reported in CDJ 1999 SC 442 wherein it was held that whenever discharge vouchers were admittedly executed voluntarily and the complainant had not alleged their execution under fraud, undue influence, misrepresentation or the like. In the absence of pleadings and evidence the State Commission was justified in dismissing their complaint. The National Commission, however, granted relief solely on the ground of delay in the settlement of claim under the policy. The mere delay of a couple of months would not have authorized National Commission to grant relief particularly when the insured had not complaint of such delay at the time of acceptance of the insurance amount under the policy. On the basis of the judgment Ld. Lawyer for o.ps. prayed for dismissal of the case.
Considering the submissions of the respective parties it is an admitted fact that the complainant enjoyed the policy issued by o.ps and during the subsistence of the said policy an accident occurred for which the complainant suffered loss and the vehicle carrying oil completely overturned. After the accident the complainant informed the said fact of accident to o.ps and surveyor was appointed and surveyor after assessing the loss submitted the report on 14/04/2015. It appears from the materials on record that insurance company started the procedure to settle the claim and accordingly, insurance company paid Rs.10,82,474/- to the complainant towards the settlement of claim of the complainant. The complainant with free consent signed discharge voucher without raising any objection and did not claim any further amount towards the settlement of claim from the insurance company. On the other hand, in the signed discharge voucher it is clearly written that "in consideration of approval of my/our/I/we hereby accept from the Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. the sum of Rs.10,82,474/- in full and final settlement of my/our claim for the loss which occurred on 09/03/2015 covered under the policy……….. I/we hereby voluntarily give discharge receipt to the company in full and final settlement of all my/our claims present or future arising directly/indirectly in respect of the said loss/accident. I/we hereby also subrogate all my/our rights and remedies to the company in respect of the above loss / damages Rs.10,82,474/-". Ld. Lawyer for the complainant has relied on the IRDA notification dated 22/06/2017 whereby such protection of interest was given in Rule 15(3), 15(8), 15(9) etc. The claim as mentioned hereinabove was settled on 15/07/2017 after the expiry of more than two years and the amount was credited to the bank account of the complainant. The discharge voucher in respect of the same was signed under compelling circumstances in as much as o.ps were not willing to release the claim when the discharge voucher being signed and the complainant was in dire need of the money since the matter was pending for more than two years and thereby the complainant was compelled to put his signature on the discharge voucher. Having regard to the said fact we hold that the judgment cited by the Ld. Lawyer for the o.ps is not applicable in this case. The o.ps released the amount because of the notification issued by IRDA dated 22/02/2017. The o.ps paid the said amount since the notification came into effect on and from 22/06/2017 and the matter was pending for the last two years and the amount was released in favour of the complainant. Thereby we hold that as per the Clause 15(3), (8), (9) the o.ps failed to comply those clause and as per 15 (10) insurance company is liable to pay the interest @2% above the bank rate prevalent at the beginning of the financial year in which the claim is received by it. The complainant asked the o.ps to pay the interest amount for the delay, but o.ps failed to comply the said request of the complainant and thereafter the complainant had to file this case. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case as per the IRDA notification dated 22/06/2017 the complainant will be entitled to get the interest of Rs.3,02,538/- as well as compensation and litigation cost since there is gross deficiency in service on the part of o.ps by withholding the claim of the complainant for next two years after the submission of the report by the surveyor. Thus all the points are disposed of accordingly.
Hence, ordered,
That the case no.94/2019 is allowed on contest with cost against the o.ps. The o.ps are jointly and/or severally directed to pay interest of Rs.3,02,538/- (Rupees Three Lakh Two Thousand Five Hundred and Thirty Eight) only to the complainant along with compensation of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand ) only for harassment and litigation cost of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) only within 30 days from the date of communication of this order, i.d. an interest @ 8% p.a. shall accrue over the entire sum due to the credit of the complainant till full realization.
