| ORDER | (Passed on 15.12.2015) Per Mr B A Shaikh, Hon’ble Presiding Member - This appeal is preferred by the original opposite party (for short O.P.) against the order dtd.30.12.2011 passed by District Consumer Forum, Nagpur in consumer complaint bearing No.236/2011 by which the complaint has been partly allowed.
- The case of the complainant as set out in the complaint in brief is that the truck owned by him was insured with the O.P. The said truck met with an accident during the period of policy and sustained damage. Therefore, the complainant incurred expenses of Rs.3.50 Lacs for repairing of that vehicle. He submitted claim proposal to the O.P. and claimed Rs.3.50 Lacs. His claim was not settled though the complainant also served legal notice to the O.P. Therefore, consumer complaint was filed before the Forum by the complainant against the O.P. claiming Rs.3.50 Lacs towards repairing expenses, Rs.1.00 Lac as compensation towards physical & mental harassment, cost of Rs.15,000/- and notice charges of Rs.2,000/- i.e. total Rs.4.67 Lacs.
- The O.P. resisted that complaint by filing reply before the Forum. It raised preliminary objection that it already paid Rs.44,681/- vide cheque dtd.31.03.2011 to the complainant, who received the same on 30.06.2011 and therefore, the complaint is liable to be dismissed.
It denied that the complainant expended Rs.3.50 Lacs for repairing of the truck. It had appointed a surveyor, who assessed the loss and submitted report on 08.03.2011. Load Challan was demanded from the complainant but it was not submitted by him. Therefore, the claim was settled at Rs.44,681/-. It, therefore, submitted that the complaint is liable to be dismissed. - The Forum below after hearing both parties and considering evidence brought on record, passed the impugned order and thereby partly allowed the complaint directing the O.P. to pay to the complainant Rs.1,36,857/- as assessed by the surveyor, after deducting the salvage charges of Rs.9,500/- and to pay interest also on that amount @ 9% p.a. from 15.02.2011 till its realization by him and also to pay him compensation of Rs.5,000/- towards physical & mental harassment and cost of Rs.3,000/-.
- The O.P. has filed this appeal against that order. We have heard learned advocate of both parties and perused copies of record the complaint and Written Notes of Arguments filed by both parties.
- The learned advocate of the appellant made submission on the
lines of aforesaid defence raised by the appellant / O.P. before the Forum and submitted that the Forum erred in partly allowing the complaint. He also submitted that the Load Challan was demanded from the complainant but he avoided to produce the same as the goods more than permitted weight as carried by the vehicle at the time of accident and this amounts to breach of terms & conditions of the policy. He, thus, argued that the complainant is not entitled to the amount awarded by the Forum as he committed breach of policy conditions. He, therefore, requested that the impugned order may be set aside. - On the other hand, the learned advocate of the complainant / respondent supported the impugned order and submitted that the surveyor did not demand any such Load challan from the complainant and that there is no evidence to show that the truck was carrying excessive goods and due to excessive weight of good the accident was occurred. He, therefore, requested the appeal may be dismissed.
- At the outset, we find that there is no evidence to show that the O.P. settled the claim by paying Rs.44,681/- to the complainant vide cheque dtd. 31.03.2011. Therefore, the defence raised by the O.P. / appellant about settlement of claim by making said payment has been rightly not considered by the Forum.
- So far as the demand of Load challan from the complainant by the O.P. / appellant is concerned, we find that surveyor appointed by the O.P did not demand any such Load challan from him. Report of the surveyor shows that the surveyor was satisfied that the truck was not carrying goods of excessive weight at the time of accident. Therefore, demand of any such Load challan and non-production of the same, no ground for settling claim at Rs.44,681/- only.
- Moreover, the O.P. has not explained as to how it agreed to settle the claim for Rs.44,681/- when it raised defence that there was breach of terms & conditions of the policy. Therefore, we are of the view that the Forum has rightly held that the O.P. rendered deficiency in service to the complainant by settling claim at Rs.44,681/- instead of settling the claim at Rs.1,36,857/- as per report of surveyor.
- We hold that the surveyor, after considering all the papers and circumstances, assessed the loss of Rs.1,36,857/-. The Forum has therefore rightly directed the O.P. to deduct salvage value of Rs.9,500/- from Rs.1,36,857/- and to pay balance amount to the complainant with interest @ 9% p.a. from 15.02.2011 and also to pay compensation of Rs.5,000/- and cost of Rs.3,000/-. We find that present appeal is devoid of merits and hence it deserves to be dismissed.
ORDER i. The appeal is dismissed. ii. No order as to costs. iii. Copy of the order be furnished to both parties free of cost. | |
