Haryana

StateCommission

A/565/2015

ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. - Complainant(s)

Versus

PAWAN OIL STORE - Opp.Party(s)

J.P.NAHAR

09 Oct 2015

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA, PANCHKULA

                                                 

First Appeal No :565 & 689 of 2015

                                       Date of Institution:06.07.2015 & 21.08.2015

Date of Decision : 09.10.2015

 

Appeal No.565 of 2015

1.      The Branch Manager, The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Opposite Hindu Girls College, Old Court Road, Jagadhri through its Branch Manager.  

2.      The Regional Manager, The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, LIC Building, Northern Chowk, Ambala Cantt, District Ambala (Haryana) through its Regional Manager.

Now through its authorized signatory S.P. Singh, Regional Manager, The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, LIC Building, Jagadhri Road, Ambala Cantt.

                                      Appellants-Opposite Parties

Versus

 

M/s Pawan Oil Store, Jaroda Gate, Jagadhri District Yamuna Nagar, through its Proprietor Pawan Kumar s/o Sh. Sunder Lal, Resident of Jaroda Gate, Jagadhri.

                                      Respondent-Complainant

 

Appeal No.689 of 2015

 

M/s Pawan Oil Store, Jaroda Gate, Jagadhri District Yamuna Nagar, through its Proprietor Pawan Kumar s/o Sh. Sunder Lal, Resident of Jaroda Gate, Jagadhri.

Appellant-Complainant

Versus

 

1.      The Branch Manager, The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Opposite Hindu Girls College, Old Court Road, Jagadhri through its Branch Manager. 

2.      The Regional Manager, The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, LIC Building, Northern Chowk, Ambala Cantt, District Ambala (Haryana) through its Regional Manager.

                                      Respondents-Opposite Parties

 

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

                             Shri B.M. Bedi, Judicial Member.

                             Shri Diwan Singh Chauhan, Member                                                                                                                                         

Present:              Shri J.P. Nahar, Advocate for Oriental Insurance Company Limited-Opposite Parties.

                             Shri Mohd. Shameem, Advocate for M/s Pawan Oil Store-complainant.  

 

                                                   O R D E R

 

NAWAB SINGH J.(ORAL)

 

This order shall dispose of afore-mentioned appeals bearing No.565 and 689 of 2015 because they have arisen out of common order dated June 9^th, 2015, passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Yamuna Nagar (for short District Forum) in complaint No.82 of 2012 filed by M/s Pawan Oil Store.

2.      Appeal No.565 of 2015 has been filed by ‘The Oriental Insurance Company Limited’ (for short ‘Insurance Company’)-Opposite Parties, for setting aside the impugned order and appeal No.689 of 2015 has been filed by complainant for enhancement of compensation.  

3.      The complainant got his Tata Oil Tanker bearing registration No. HR-58-3393, insured with the Insurance Company from March 20^th, 2011 to March 19^th, 2012, vide Insurance Policy (Exhibit R-5) for Rs.3,75,000/-.

4.      On May 8^th, 2011 at about 09.00 A.M., the Oil Tanker was being driven from Kinnaur to Ambala by Jagir Singh s/o Bachan Singh and when it reached on NH-22 near Maling Nala, Maling, District Kinnaur (H.P.), it went off the road and fell into the gorge. Three persons including the driver died on the spot. The Oil Tanker was damaged badly. F.I.R. No.16 dated May 8^th, 2011, under Sections 279,337,304-A of the Indian Penal Code, was lodged in Police Station Pooh, District Kinnaur. The Insurance Company was informed.  It appointed Er. Rajneesh Kumar Dhiman, Surveyor, to inspect the spot and submit the report.  He submitted his report (Exhibit R-2).  Operative part of the report is reproduced as under:-

“….Further proceeded for the spot in the early morning on 14/5/2011 and reached the spot of accident near Maling Nala, Maling, about 12 kms. Far from Nako towards Chango, NH-22, Sub Tehsil Hang Rang, Distt. Kinnaur, HP at about 8:30 A.M. on 14/05/2011 and thoroughly inspected the spot. A temple existed near the spot. The road was almost level and was having wide sharp curve at the spot. The insured vehicle, Tata SE 1613/42 TC petroleum tanker No.HR-58-3393 was shattered and its wreck was scattered on the steep hill slope at a steep slant depth of about 100 meters to 250 meters from the road head. Loose boulders were spread on the entire hill slope at the spot. The condition of the wreck revealed the accident to be fresh. I noted down the damages to the insured vehicle and took a few photographs depicting the same/its condition/its identity/spot conditions/location/ nature of accident. since neither the insured nor any its representatives have turned up to furnish details of this accident, therefore I, the undersigned, am submitting my independent report on the basis of information gathered from police and physical spot verifications………..”

5.      The Insurance Company appointed another surveyor Shri Mohinder K. Sharma to assess the loss caused to the truck.  He assessed the loss at Rs.2,84,000/-.  The report is Exhibit R-4.

6.      The complainant filed claim with the Insurance Company but the same was repudiated vide letter dated September 27^th, 2012 (Exhibit C-8) on the ground that the driver of the Oil Tanker was not having valid and effective driving licence authorizing him to drive vehicle carrying hazardous goods.

7.      Aggrieved of the repudiation of its claim, the complainant filed complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

8.      The Insurance Company contested the complaint by filing reply reiterating the ground mentioned in repudiation letter Exhibit C-8.

9.      District Forum vide impugned order accepted complaint and directed the Insurance Company as under:-

“(a)    To pay a sum of Rs.2,84,000/- alongwith interest at the rate of 7% per annum from the date of filing of complaint to the date of decision.

(b)     To pay a sum of Rs.3000/- as compensation on account of unnecessary harassment.

(c)     To pay Rs.2,000/- as cost of litigation expenses.

The aforesaid directions must be complied with by the OP-Insurance Company within the stipulated period otherwise aforesaid awarded amount shall attract further simple interest @ 9% per annum for the period of default. The complaint is partly accepted accordingly in the above terms.”

10.    While assailing the impugned order, learned counsel for the Insurance Company has urged that the driver of the Oil Tanker was not holding valid and effective driving licence authorizing him to drive vehicle carrying hazardous goods. In support, reference was made to the report of Licensing Authority Exhibit R-6.

11.    Vide driving licence (Exhibit C-3) and the report of Licensing Authority, Patiala, Jagir Singh was holding a valid licence to drive 

12.    Indisputably, the driving licence (Exhibit C-3) of driver Jagir Singh-driver, was valid from 29.01.2010 to 28.01.2013. The accident took place on 08.05.2011, that is, within the validity period of Driving Licence obtained by driver. The Certificate (Exhibit C-4) issued from Indian Training Institute, Ind. Safety & Health Advancement, Ram Nagar, Roorkee, shows that Jagir Singh son of Bachan Singh had completed the basic/Refresher safety course under the provision of OISD-154 Course, for safe transportation of hazardous goods. The duration of the course was three days, that is, from 01.01.2011 to 03.01.2011. Thus, on the date of accident, Jagir Singh-driver was fully authorized to drive a transport vehicle carrying goods of dangerous or hazardous nature. The Insurance Company wrongly repudiated complainant’s claim.

13.    Coming to the contention raised on behalf of the complainant for enhancement of claim. The IDV of the Oil Tanker was Rs.3,75,000/-. The surveyor of the Insurance Company vide report (Exhibit R-4) assessed the net loss of Rs.2,84,000/-. The complainant has not led any evidence contrary to the report of the surveyor. So, no case for enhancement of compensation is made out.  

14.    In view of the above both the appeals are dismissed.

15.    The statutory amount of Rs.25,000/- deposited at the time of filing the appeal No.565 of 2015 be refunded to the complainant against proper receipt and identification in accordance with rules, after the expiry of period of appeal/revision, if any.

 

 

Announced 09.10.2015

Diwan Singh Chauhan Member

B.M. Bedi Judicial Member

Nawab Singh President

CL