Haryana

StateCommission

A/888/2015

M/S FUTURISTIC SALES PVT.LTD. - Complainant(s)

Versus

UIIC - Opp.Party(s)

A.S.KHARA

26 Apr 2016

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, HARYANA,PANCHKULA

                                                 

First Appeal No.888 of 2015

Date of Institution: 14.10.2015

Date of Decision: 26.04.2016

 

M/s Futuristic Sales Private Limited, 51-52, Industrial Estate, Phase II, Yamuna Nagar through its Director Sh.Sarwan Kumar Aggarwal aged about 66/67 years S/o Sh.Shiv Das Mal Aggarwal, r/o H.No.49, Industrial Area, Yamuna Nagar.

     …..Appellant

                                                Versus

 

1. United India Insurance Company Ltd., Branch Office Kurukshetra through its Senior Branch Manager.

2.      The United India Insurance Company Ltd., Divisional office Karnal through its Divisional Manager.

         …..Respondents

 

CORAM:   Mr. R.K.Bishnoi, Judicial Member.
                   Mrs.Urvashi Agnihotri, Member.

 

Present:-    Mr.A.S.Khara, Advocate for the appellants.

Mr.P.S.Saini, Advocate counsel for the  respondents.

 

                                      O R D E R

 

URVASHI AGNIHOTRI, MEMBER:

 

1. M/s Futuristic Sales Private Limited – complainant is in appeal against the Order dated 14.09.2015 passed by the learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (for short ‘District Forum’), Kurukshetra, for the enhancement of the claim partly allowed in his favour.   
2. In brief, the complainant purchased a Truck / Canter, in question from M/s B.S. Transport and got transferred its registration certificate from the Registering Authority in their name on 25.09.2012. On 01.10.2012 the Truck / Canter met with an accident with a tractor trolley. The driver of the tractor trolley and the driver of the tractor died in the accident and the truck in question was also extensively damaged. The OP was duly informed and the survey was conducted. The complainant submitted the estimate of repair of Rs.5,03,708/- on 08.10.2012 issued by the authorized dealer of Tata Motors Limited, but the OP did not grant the same for in indefinite period. Aggrieved by this, the complainant approached the District Forum claiming accidental insured amount of Rs.3,81,151/- alongwith for harassment and mental agony etc.   
3. In reply, OP pleaded that the claim was repudiated by the competent authority on the ground that the complainant had purchased the vehicle from M/s B.S. Transport and got transferred its registration certificate from Registering Authority in their name on 25.09.2012, whereas the complainant applied for transfer of insurance on 01.10.2012 during the office hours. Till than the vehicle had already met with an accident in Amritsar on 01.10.2012 at 4.30 A.M. Thereupon, the learned District Forum partly allowed the complaint by granting the following relief:-

“14. Thus, as a sequel to our above discussion, we partly allow the present complaint and direct the OPs to make the payment of Rs.3,18,805/- alongwith interest @9% per annum from the date of filing of present complaint i.e. 28.10.2013 till realization to the complaint. We direct the OPs to pay a further amount of Rs.5000/- as compensation to the complainant”.

 

4. Against this impugned order dated 14.09.2015, the complainant has come up in appeal before us and has vehemently reiterated the contentions raised before the District Forum. In nutshell the appellant contends that the learned District Forum award the amount of Rs.3,18,805/- instead of Rs.3,81,151/- and he is entitled for the amount of Rs.3,81,151/-.  
5. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the record. It has been settled that report of Surveyor cannot be brushed aside without sufficient cause and carries value. Hon’ble National Commission has opined in case cited as D.N. BADONI Versus Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. I (2012) CPJ 272 (NC) as under:-

“It is well settled law that a Surveyor’s report has significant evidentiary value unless it is proved otherwise which petitioner has failed to do so in the instant case”.

Similar view is also taken by Hon’ble National Commission in New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs Pave Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd. 2015 (2) CPR 577 (NC).

 

            In the present case, the OP got the survey of the vehicle conducted by Sh. Gurdeep Singh, Surveyor, who assed the loss for Rs.3,18,805/- by reducing it from Rs.3,81,151/- as previously assessed. Consequently, we  fully endorse the conclusion arrived at by the learned District Forum in partly allowing the complaint. There being no merit in the appeal the same is dismissed with no order as to costs.   

 

April 26th, 2016                      Urvashi Agnihotri                                R.K.Bishnoi,                                                   Member                                               Judicial Member                                              Addl. Bench                                        Addl.Bench                

S.K.