ORDER BY HON’BLE PRESIDENT- MR. P.K. PADHI:
JUDGMENT
As per R.P. No.08/2023 filed on 27.7.2023 by opposite party No.1 (petitioner) the judgment 30.6.2023 is revised and corrected.
Opposite parties have repudiated the insurance claim of commercial motor goods carrying policy No.0000000025779522/ SB2110180068 valid from 16.11.2021 to 15.11.2022 on the basis of the fact that the driver of the vehicle was not Sanjay Kumar Sahoo as revealed during investigation.
The complainant has filed the report of investigator (Aryavan Associates Pvt. Ltd.) which speaks as follows;
“From the above collected statement of the Insured & IV driver, spot verification, PS visit, Highway Patrol staff visit, Ambulance driver visit, Witness visit, DHH Sundergarh hospital visit & workshop visit we don’t find any fraud angle in the above claim.
Hence the Insurance Company is the best authority to decide on the case depending upon the terms and conditions of the policy issued.”
Both parties were directed to file the report of Investigator (Aryavan Associates Pvt. Ltd.) which the complainant has complied but opposite party has failed to comply. Non settlement of claim in time amounts to deficiency in service.
We therefore direct the opposite parties to settle the claim of complainant on the basis of report submitted by complainant and pay the claim amount of Rs.20,61,637.63 paisa with 10% simple interest from the date of accident to till date of payment and we also impose cost of Rs.50,000/- (fifty thousand) for mental agony, Rs.2,00,000/- (two lakhs) for loss of business and Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) towards cost of litigation. The order passed to be carried out within 45 days from the date of passing of the order. With the aforesaid observation and direction the consumer complaint is disposed of.
R.A. No.08/2023
(Arising out of C.C. No.183/2022)
ORDER
The opposite party has filed R.A. No.08/2023 seeking review of order dtd.30.6.2023, which is within the limitation period as prescribed U/s.40 of C.P. Act, 2019.
While detecting the order it was observed that both parties were directed to file the report of Investigator (Aryavan Associates Pvt. Ltd.) which the complainant has complied but opposite party has failed to comply. Non settlement of claim in time amounts to deficiency in service, but it was wrongly types as follows;
“The counsel for opposite parties also admitted the report of investigator to be correct for non settlement of claim in time amounts to deficiency in service.”
For which in order to rectify the typographical error the following may be substituted in para-5 of the judgment as follows;
“Both parties were directed to file the report of Investigator (Aryavan Associates Pvt. Ltd.) which the complainant has complied but opposite party has failed to comply. Non settlement of claim in time amounts to deficiency in service.”
Accordingly R.A is disposed of and the corrected copy of the judgment of C.C. No.183/2022 be supplied to both parties and the copy of judgment supplied earlier may be returned to the registry by concerned parties.
Pronounced in the open Commission on this 27th July,2023.
