Per – Hon’ble Mr. S. R. Khanzode, Presiding Judicial Member
Heard Adv. Milind Mahajan on behalf of the Appellant/ original Opponent (hereinafter referred to as ‘the insurance company’ for the sake of brevity). Inspite of an intimation given of the date of hearing notified on the notice-board as well as on the internet and in addition to it, by way of an abundant precaution, further intimation given by post on 25/7/2011, the Respondent/original Complainant (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Complainant’ for the sake of brevity) prefer to remain absent. Therefore, the appeal is heard in his absence.
[2] This appeal takes an exception to an order dated 30/11/2000 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Satara (‘the Forum’ in short) in Consumer Complaint No.170 of 2000, Mr. Amar Raghunath Gaikwad Vs. The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. The consumer complaint relates to an insurance claim of a vehicle which met with an accident on 10/12/1998. By way of settlement, the insurance company has paid an amount of `44,675/-, on the instructions of the Complainant, to the garage where the insured vehicle was kept for repairs. According to the Complainant, an amount of `30,500/- towards the full settlement of the repair expenses was not paid and, therefore, he filed a consumer complaint. It is the case of the insurance company that earlier payment of an amount of `44,675/- was made in full and final settlement of the insurance claim and the Complainant himself acknowledged it accordingly and, therefore, there being no deficiency in service on the part of the insurance company, the consumer complaint ought to have been dismissed by the Forum. By the impugned order, the Forum directed the insurance company to pay to the Complainant, an amount of `22,982/- together with interest thereon @ 15% p.a., besides an amount of `1,000/- by way of compensation towards mental hardship and `500/- towards costs. Feeling aggrieved thereby, the insurance company preferred this appeal.
[3] Considering the fact that the particular defence raised by the insurance company, that the payment of an amount of `44,675/- was made in full and settlement of the Complainant’s claim and which gets corroboration from the letter of discharge and acknowledgement issued by the Complainant himself, (which is on the record) it is not possible to infer any deficiency in service on the part of the insurance company. Therefore, the impugned order cannot be supported. We hold accordingly and pass the following order:-
ORDER
Appeal is allowed.
Impugned order dated 30/11/2000 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Satara in Consumer Complaint No.170 of 2000 hereby stands set aside. Consequently, the consumer complaint stands dismissed.
No order as to costs.
Pronounced and dictated on 13th December, 2011
