Rajasthan

StateCommission

A/850/2010

M/s G.P.Oil Mill F.114/115 RLLCO Industrial Area - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

Devandar Chouhan

27 Mar 2015

ORDER

BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,RAJASTHAN,JAIPUR BENCH NO.1

 

FIRST APPEAL NO: 850/2010

 

M/s. G.P. Oil Mill, F-114/115, RIICO Industrial Area, Shahjahanpur Distt. Alwar through Partner Sh.Gajendra Jha

Vs.

Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. 70 Panchwati, Alwar through Branch Manager

 

Date of Order 27.3.2015

 

Before:

 

Hon'ble Mr.Vinay Kumar Chawla-Presiding Member

Mrs.Sunita Ranka - Member

Mr. Kailash Soyal - Member

 

Mr.Pankaj Jain counsel for the appellant

Mr. Damodar Lal Sharma counsel for the respondent

 

BY THE STATE COMMISSION

 

This appeal has been filed against the order dated 1.04.2010

2

 

passed by the learned DCF Alwar by which it dismissed the complaint.

 

Brief facts giving rise to this dispute are that the complainant is a partnership firm engaged in producing mustard oil and works under the name and style of G.P.Oil Mill,Shahjahanpur. The complainant had taken a transit insurance cover for its produce dispatched to other places. The complainant alleged that on 11.10.2003 he dispatched 1440 tins of mustard oil vide its bill no. 251 costing Rs.11,59,200/- to Sriram Bhandar, Baleshwar (Orissa). He lodged theft claim of this consignment with the Insurance Company alleging that the consignment has been stolen in the way and has not reached the consignee. A FIR No. 223/2003 was lodged with the PS Shahjahanpur Distt. Alwar. The Company appointed a surveyor for investigating the matter and on the basis of survey report the company found that incident did never happen and it repudiated the claim. The complainant filed a complaint before the learned DCF which also relied on the report of the surveyor and dismissed the complaint.

 

The learned counsel for the appellant has strenuously argued that the consignment was dispatched to Baleshwar (Orissa ) which had been lost in the way. The driver had absconded with the truck

3

 

and the FIR was lodged with the Police Station, though the police in the primary investigation closed the case as “accused and the goods could not be seized” but later on the police was able to arrest the driver and he was chargesheeted u/s 420, 406 IPC etc. He states that the investigation cannot be false and the reasons given by the learned DCF are not sustainable.

 

The learned counsel for the company on the other hand has argued that detailed investigation was conducted by the surveyor appointed by the company who has also supported his finding by submitting an affidavit before the learned DCF and the incident was found false.

 

We have heard both the counsels and have perused the record. The surveyor has found that two loading slips of the same consignment were issued. Through first loading slip the consignment was sent to Ranchi ( Bihar ) by truck no. HR 55 A 1889 while with the second loading slip the same consignment by the same truck was sent to Baleshwar (Orissa). During investigation the surveyor found that blank GR book was received from partner of the complainant which was signed, which means that two loading slips had been issued; one by Pawan Kumar Chaudhary who was owner of the transport company and other slip

4

 

was made by Gajendra Jha who is partner in the complainant firm by which the consignment was shown to have been sent to Orissa.

 

The most important thing which the surveyor found that he enquired from Sriram Bhandar, Baleshwar (Orissa) who were the consignees and they refused to have ordered any consignment from the complainant and they also refused that they were dealing in mustard oil and it was also found that formerly Sriram Bhandar was dealing in 'Gur' business but later on this firm had been closed. The non-delivery certificate was also investigated by the surveyor and the mobile number which was given on the certificate was found to be of one Sh.Ashok Bajaj and who also have denied any order from the complainant. Secondly, it is also revealed that the transporter Pawan Chaudhary has denied having sent any consignment through his truck to Baleshwar. His statements are contradictory on the point that whether any consignment was sent to Baleshwar (Orissa) or not. It is also not explained that why the complainant did not lodge the FIR against the transport company through which this consignment was sent and transport company was also not made a party in the complaint filed before the learned DCF. The surveyor also found that the driver of the alleged truck no. HR 55 A 1889 left alone with the truck. He was not accompanied by any co-driver or cleaner though going for a long distance to Orissa, though the police

5

 

after three years has submitted a chargesheet against the driver u/s 420, 406 IPC but the investigation in the alleged incident by the company's surveyor has been raised several doubts which lead to the inference that the claim is not genuine. How could two loading slips can be issued for one consignment, how a blank GR book was received from the complainant and the consignee himself does not corroborate that he has ordered any consignment from the complainant and the non-delivery certificate was also found to be false. There is no mention of the fact that how the payment was to be received from Sriram Bhandar. On querry from the bench during arguments that how the payment was to be received, the learned counsel has not been able to explain.

 

In view of this fact we find that there is no force in this appeal and the same deserves to be dismissed. The appeal is hereby dismissed.

 

 

Member Member Presiding Member

 

nm