STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA, PANCHKULA

First Appeal No  :      102 of 2015

Date of Institution:      28.01.2015

Date of Decision :       25.05.2015

Rameshwar Dutt s/o Sh. Parmanand, Resident of Kath Mandi, Gohana, District Sonepat (9416160124)

                                      Appellant-Complainant

Versus

Oriental Insurance Company Limited, 1^st, Floor, Rohtak Road, Gohana, District Sonepat.

                                      Respondent-Opposite Party

CORAM:             Hon’ble Mr. Justice Nawab Singh, President.

                             Shri B.M. Bedi, Judicial Member.

                             Shri Diwan Singh Chauhan, Member                                                                                                                                         

Present:               Appellant-Rameshwar Dutt, in person.

                             Shri J.P. Nahar, Advocate for respondent.

                                                   O R D E R

NAWAB SINGH J.(ORAL)

This complainant’s appeal is directed against the order dated January 5^th, 2015, passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (for short ‘District Forum’), Sonepat.

2.      Rameshwar Dutt-complainant (appellant herein) was the owner of truck bearing registration No.HR-11H-0459. The truck was insured with Oriental Insurance Company Limited (for short ‘Insurance Company’)-Opposite Party, from May 4^th, 2011 to May 3^rd, 2012 vide Insurance Policy Exhibit C-4. The Insured Declared Value (for short ‘IDV’) of the truck was Rs.10.00 lacs.

3.      During the intervening night of April 15^th/16^th, 2012, the truck was stolen. F.I.R. No.122 (Exhibit C-5) under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code, was immediately registered in Police Station, Kundli, District Sonipat on April 16^th, 2012.  Intimation to the Insurance Company was also given. The Police submitted untraced report Exhibit C-11 and the same was accepted by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sonipat, vide order Exhibit C-10. He filed claim with the Insurance Company but the same was repudiated vide letter Exhibit R-4. He filed complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

4.      Vide impugned order, the District Forum allowed the complaint and issued direction to the Insurance Company as under:-

“…..we hereby direct the respondent to deduct 5% depreciated value alongwith necessary excess clause from the IDV of the vehicle and thereafter to make the remaining payment to the complainant within a period of one month from the date of passing of this order, failing which, the aforesaid remaining payment shall fetch interest at the rate of 09% per annum from the date of passing of this order till its realization. The respondent is also directed to compensate the complainant to the tune of Rs.5,000/- for rendering deficient services, for causing unnecessary mental agony and harassment.”

5.      Aggrieved of the impugned order, the complainant has filed the instant appeal praying that the District Forum should have awarded interest to him from the date of filing of the complaint and not from the date of passing of the order.

6.      The plea raised by the appellant-complainant is tenable. In view of this, this Commission modifies the order of the District Forum to the effect that the complainant is entitled to interest at the rate of 9% per annum on the awarded amount from the date of filing of the complaint, that is, July 8^th, 2013, till its realization.  

7.      The appeal is disposed of accordingly.

CL