BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMERS FORUM: KURNOOL
Present: Sri.K.V.H. Prasad, ,M.A., LL.M., PRESIDENT
And
Smt. C.Preethi, M.A., LL.B., Lady Member
Friday the 4th day of May, 2007
C.CNo.143/2006
K.V. Nagabhushanam Setty,
C/o Sri Ravi Oil trading Company, U.Kothapalli, Dhone Kurnool District.
Versus
The Divisional Manager, M/s New India Assurance Company Limited,
H.No.40/526-12,1st Floor, HDCT Complex, R.S. Road, Kurnool.
This complaint coming on this day for hearing in the presence of Sri M.Shivaji Rao, Advocate, Kurnool for complainant and Sri P.Ramanjaneyulu, Advocate, Kurnool for opposite party upon the persuing the material papers on record, the Forum made the following.
ORDER
C.C. No. 143/2006
As per Sri. K.V.H. Prasad, President
1. This case of the complainant is filed U/S 12 of C.P. Act.., seeking direction on the opposite party to pay him Rs.71,710/- as to the value of 7,645 liters of kerosene which was damaged in accident occurred to its carrying tank truck bearing No.AP21 T 3384 on 25-10-2004 at 00.30 hours at Peravalli (V) while the said goods was being carried for its distribution to various dealers, Rs.20,000/- for mental agony suffered by the complainant at the non settlement of the claim by the opposite party, and costs of this case alleging the complainant as the owner of the said vehicle insured with the opposite party and the claim was not settled by the opposite party.
2. In pursuance of the receipt of the notice of this forum as to this case of the complainant the opposite party has made its appearance into the case through its counsel and contested the case filling written version denying any of its liability and seeking dismissal of the case with exemplary costs as the policy of the insurance issued to the complainant’s vehicle being not a marine transit policy covering the goods in transit and on the other hand it being a mere motor policy covering only to third party damages and own damage occurred to said vehicle.
3. In substantiation of the contentions while the complainant’s side has relied upon documentary record in Ex.A1 to A5 besides to its sworn affidavit in reiteration of complainant’s case, the opposite party side has taken reliance on to the Ex.B1 and the sworn affidavit of the opposite party in reiteration of its defence.
4. Hence, the point for the consideration is whether any deficiency of service of the opposite party is made out by the complainant to hold the liability of the opposite party to complainant’s claim.
5. While the Ex.A1 is the certified copy of the charge sheet filed in J.F.C.M. Court Gooty in Cr.No.181/2004 of P.S. Gooty U/S 304A and 337 I.P.C. alleging the accident to Oil tanker bearing No.AP21 T 3384 carrying Kerosene load, due to rash and negligent drive of said vehicle by its driver on 25-10-2004 at 00.30 hours near 7/6 furlong stone near Basinipallithanda, hitting rear side of a tractor trailor and it resulted injuries to two persons and death a person by name C.R.Ananta Narayan, the Ex.A2 and A3 of the P.M.E report held on said deceased and M.V.I report on the said accident vehicle respectively. While the Ex.A4 is attested xerox of letter of complainant giving mere intimation of accident to the opposite party as to quantum of load delivered and quantum of kerosene load damaged in said accident to its tank truck bearing No.AP21 T 3384 on the intervening night of 24/25-10-2004, the Ex.A5 is the office copy of legal notice dt:27-3-2006 said to have been caused on the opposite party demanding payment of the cost of 7,645 liters of kerosene, cash of Rs.60,000/- lost in said accident occurred to the said tank truck carrying 12 K.liters of Kerosene and the said vehicle is covered under insurance policy bearing No.611500/31/04/03872 issued by the opposite party.
6. The perusal of the Ex.B1 – the supra stated insurance policy – indicates it as a mere motor policy covering the third party damage and own damage. Hence, it is not a marine transit policy covering risk of loss to the goods carried in said tank truck. That being so and there being any privy of contract of insurance between the complainant and the opposite party creating the liability on the later for the goods in transit in said tank truck of the complainant, the Ex.A1 to A4 which merely says of the incidents of accident and Ex.A5 a mere demand notice without any insurable interest to the complainant in the goods lost, they are remaining with any relevancy for consideration in this case, as they are off any help for assessing any deficiency of service of the opposite party towards the complainant, and no the case of the complainant remains devoid of merit and force.
7. As the complainant knowingly well the nature of Ex.B1 policy covering the said tank truck as mere motor policy covering the risk of third party damage and own damage only and not of any goods in transit carried in said vehicle as in the case of a marine transit policy, dragged the opposite party to the forum filling this frivolus and vexatious complaint, the complainant is liable to pay an amount of Rs.5,000/- to the opposite party as exemplary costs the awarded U/S 26 C.P. Act., by this forum.
8. Consequently, the case of the complainant being devoid of merit and force creating any liability on the opposite party to the complainant’s claim for any deficiency of service the complaint is dismissed, simultaneously Ordering the complainant to pay to the opposite party Rs.5,000/- as exemplary costs within a month of the receipt of this order. In default the said exemplary costs awarded U/S 26 C.P. Act., shall be payable with an interest at 9% P.A from the date of said default till realization.
Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by him, corrected and pronounced by us Open bench on this the 4th day of May 2007.
MEMBER PRESIDENT
Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER PRESIDENT
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
Witnesses Examined
For the Complainant:Nil For the Opposite Parties: Nil
List of Exhibits marked for the complainant:-
Ex.A1 Office copy of charge Sheet dated 26-10-2004 in Cr.No.181/04.
Ex.A2 Certificate copy of postmortem certificate.
Ex.A3 Certificate copy of Motor Accident Inspector (MAI) report.
Ex.A4 Office copy of letter dated 28-10-2004 of complainant addressed to O.P.
Ex.A5 Office of copy of legal notice, Dated 27-03-2006 along with its acknowledgement.
List of Exhibits marked for the opposite parties:-
Ex.B1 Office copy policy No.611500/31/04/01/00003872 along with terms and conditions (No.in 11 pages)
Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER PRESIDENT
Copy to:
- Sri. M.Sivaji Rao, Advocate , Kurnool.
- Sri. P.Ramanjaneyulu, Advocate, Kurnool.
Copy was made ready on:
Copy was dispatched on:
Copy was delivered to parties
