<br /> <br /> <br /> By SRI.R. VIJAYAKUMAR, MEMBER.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> The complaint is filed for getting an order directing the opp.parties to pay an additional amount of Rs.48,000/- as compensation with interest and cost.<br /> <br /> <br /> The averments in the complaint can be briefly summarized as follows:<br /> <br /> The JCB JS 75 owned by the complainant was insured with the opp.parties with policy No.100703/31/03/02451. On 9.10.2004 at 6 p.m. the said JCB fell down from a Lorry while it was loading for transportation. The driver and cleaner were injured and admitted to Medical College Hospital, Thiruvananthapuram. A case was registered at Chadayamangalam Police under section 279, 338 IPC by Crime No.333/04 against one Prasad. The vehicle had damaged to a tune of Rs.87,600/- petitioner had to suffer loss to the tune of Rs.60,000/- by repairs non work and due to the transportation of vehicle. A claim application was submitted before the opp.parties 9.10.2004 along with bills etc. but it was repudiated on allegation that the accident is lnot occurred during operation and over turning cover is not included in the policy. Subsequently the claim was considered by the opp.party on 18.3.2005 and allotted Rs.12,300/- towards fall and final settlement and issued cheque. Even though complainant entitled to get Rs.60,000/- only Rs.12,300/- was paid. The non-payment of entire amount is deficiency in service. Hence the complaint..<br /> <br /> The opp.party filed version contenting, interalia, that the complaint is not maintainable either in law on or facts. The opp.party had issued a comprehensive policy to the complainant’s Escorts JCB Machine NO.JA.75/2003 for a sum of Rs.23,20,000/-. The complainant reported a claim before the opp.party stating that the insured JCB met with an accident while loading it to a tipper lorry on 9.10.2004 at Kaithakkuzhy. The claim form was submitted along with an estimate for repairs. Opp.party deputed a Government of India Licensed Insurance Surveyor and Loss Assessor Mr. PTR Babu for inspecting and assessing the loss. The surveyor inspected machine on 18.10.2004 and again visited M/s. Bharath General Engine cringe works , Anchal where the damaged vehicle was kept for repairs. The Surveyor after detailed examination and discussions with the repairs has assessed the extent of loss payable as per policy condition. The <br /> surveyor assessed Rs.9463.27 after deducting compulsory policy excess of Rs.11600/- opp.party finalized the claim amount payable Rs.12300/- including Towing charges spent by the complainant and after deducting salvage value to a sum of Rs.279.81. The opp.party initially repudiated the claim disputing cause of damage but afterwards Grievance Review Committee of opp.party re-opened the file on the basis of the request by the complainant and decided to settle the claim on the basis of Survey Report. The discharge voucher was signed by the complainant and the claim was settled fully and finally. Mandatory deduction of 5% of the sum ensured is required under the policy. The claim advanced by the complainant for Rs.20,000/- towards loss of income due to non-functioning of JCB is also not maintainable. There is no deficiency in service on the part of opp.party. Hence he prays for disposal of the complaint with cost to the opp.party.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> The points that would arise for consideration are:<br /> 1. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opp.party.<br /> 2. Reliefs and costs.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> For the complainant PW.1 is examined. Exts. P1 and P2 series marked.<br /> <br /> For the opp.party DW.1 examined. Exts. D1 to D3 are marked.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Point 1 and II<br /> <br /> According to the complainant is actual loss is Rs.37,600/- for repairs and Rs.20,000/- due to non-functioning . Complainant has submitted supporting Bills for the amount of Rs.37,600/- According to him he is entitled to get Rs.60,000/- as compensation. The learned counsel for opp.party argued that the claim was initially repudiated for the opp.party because overturning is not covered under this policy. Only on the basis of the complainant’s request Grievance Review Committee of opp.party reopened the file. Opp.party is liable to pay compensation only on the basis of policy condition. Loss assessed by the Government of India Licensed Surveyor and Loss assessor. Deduction of policy excess is mandatory and it cannot be avoided Ext. D1 copy of policy shows that there is a condition for mandatory deduction of 5% of the insured amount Rs.11,600/- Ext.D2 is survey report. The surveyor assessed loss of Rs.23,063.27 Exhibit D3 Discharge voucher signed by the complainant shows that the amount of Rs.11,600/- was received as the full and final settlement. The complainant stated that he received the amount on protest. No material submitted to show that he received the amount on protest.<br /> <br /> The claim advanced for the complainant to a sum of Rs.20,000/- towards loss of income due to non-functioning of machine is not legally sustainable and so it is to be discarded.<br /> <br /> For all that has been discussed above we are of the view that there is no deficiency in service on the part of opp.party. Point found accordingly.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> In the result the complaint fails and the same is hereby dismissed. No costs.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Dated this the 6th day of June, 2008.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> I n d e x<br /> <br /> List of witnesses for the complainant <br /> PW.1 - Sodharan<br /> <br /> List of documents for the complainant<br /> P1. – Repudiation Letter<br /> P2. – purchase bills<br /> <br /> List of witnesses for the opp.party<br /> DW..1- P.T.R. Babu<br /> <br /> List of documents for the opp.party<br /> D1. –True copy of policy<br /> D2. – Survey report<br /> D3. – Voucher.<br /> <br /> <br />