Haryana

StateCommission

A/341/2015

DEV TRACTORS - Complainant(s)

Versus

UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD. - Opp.Party(s)

R.S.HOODA

01 Sep 2015

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA, PANCHKULA

                                                 

First Appeal No  :     341 of 2015

Date of Institution:     15.04.2015

Date of Decision :      01.09.2015

 

Dev Tractors Palwal, Delhi-Mathura G.T. Road, Tehsil and District Palwal,  through its General Manager.

                                      Appellant-Opposite Party No.1

Versus

 

1.      The United India Insurance Company Limited, Ist Floor Champa Bhawan, Delhi-Mathura G.T. Road, Tehsil and District Palwal.

Respondent-Opposite Party No.2

2.      Sarita w/o late Shri Madan Lal @ Madan Singh, Resident of Village Phoolwari, Tehsil and District Palwal.

                                      Respondent-Complainant

 

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

                             Shri B.M. Bedi, Judicial Member.

                             Mrs. Urvashi Agnihotri, Member.                                                                     

Present:              Shri Ravi Kant, Advocate appearing on behalf of Shri J.S. Hooda, Advocate for appellant.

                             Shri Nitin Gupta, Advocate for respondent No.1.

                             Shri Prithvesh, Advocate for respondent No.2.

 

                                                   O R D E R

 

B.M. BEDI, JUDICIAL MEMBER

 

Dev Tractors Palwal – Opposite Party No.1, is in appeal against the order dated December 11^th, 2014, passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (for short ‘District Forum’), Palwal, whereby Consumer Complaint No.13 of 2014 filed by Sarita-Complainant-respondent No.2, was allowed.

2.      Madan Lal @ Madan Singh (since deceased) - husband of complainant (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Insured’), was employed as ‘Salesman’ with the appellant - Dev Tractors. He was insured with The United India Insurance Company Limited (for short referred to as ‘the Insurance Company’)-Opposite Party No.2 (respondent No.1) for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- vide ‘Group Personal Accident Policy (Exhibit R-1).  The insured died on May 27^th, 2011 in a road side accident when he was going on his motor cycle. F.I.R. No.191 dated 28.05.2011 under Section 279/304-A of the Indian Penal Code, (Exhibit C-1) was registered in Police Station, Sadar, Palwal. Post Mortem Examination of deceased was conducted on May 28^th, 2011. The Post Mortem Report is Exhibit R-5. Death Certificate Exhibit R-6 was issued by Medical Officer, Aurangabad, Distict Palwal. The complainant filed claim with the Opposite Parties but to no avail.

3.      The complainant filed complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. Notice being issued, the opposite parties contested complaint.

4.      In its reply, the opposite party No.1 stated that the deceased was not on duty at the time of his death and the accident took place due to his negligent act, therefore, nothing was payable to the complainant. However, it was admitted that the deceased was an employee of the opposite party No.1 and was insured with the Insurance Company-opposite party No.2.

5.      The opposite party No.2- Insurance Company, in its reply stated that the accident took place on May 27, 2011 and claim was submitted on December 16^th, 2011 and thus there was inordinate delay in submitting the claim.

6.      On appraisal of the pleadings of the parties and the evidence brought on the record, the District Forum vide impugned order accepted complaint issuing direction as under:-

                  

“(i)              Opposite party no. 1 being the owner of the motorcycle in question bearing no. HR30C/9797 is directed to pay compensation to the tune of Rs.1,00,000/- with interest @ 9% per annum fro the date of filing of the complaint till its realization.

 

(ii)             Opposite party no. 1 is further directed to pay compensation for harassment and mental agony to the tune of Rs.5,000/- and further burdened with the litigation expenses to the tune of Rs.2100/- to the complainant.

 

(iii)            Opposite party no. 2 is similarly directed to pay the insured amount under group personal accident policy of Rs.1,00,000/-to the complainant  with interest @ 9% per annum fro the date of filing of the complaint till its realization.

 

(iv)            Opposite party no. 2 is further directed to pay  compensation for harassment and mental agony both physically as well as financially  to the tune of Rs.5,000/- and further burdened with the litigation expenses to the tune of Rs.2100/- to the complainant within 45 days from the receipt of copy of this order otherwise both the opposite parties no. 1 and 2 jointly and severally be further burdened with a cost of Rs.25,000/- which will be paid to the complainant in addition to the above order”.

 

7.      Hence, the instant appeal.

8.      Learned counsel for the appellant-opposite party No.1 has argued that the deceased was insured with the opposite party No.2-Insurance Company for Rs.1.00 lacs. Therefore, nothing was payable by it to the complainant.

9.      The contention raised on behalf of the appellant is tenable. It is not in dispute the deceased was insured for Rs.1.00 lac. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company states that the insured amount of Rs.1.00 lac alongwith other relief granted by the District Forum has already been paid to the complainant.

10.    In view of the above, the instant appeal is accepted, the impugned order qua direction to the appellant is set aside.

11.    Learned counsel for the complainant-respondent No.2 urged that the complainant may be permitted to pursue the remedy, if so available under the Motor Vehicle Act to file claim in the event of there being any negligence on the part of any offending vehicle.

12.    The complainant is at liberty to file claim under any other law, if so maintainable and the remedy is available.

13.    The statutory amount of Rs.1,000/- deposited at the time of filing the appeal be refunded to the appellant against proper receipt and identification in accordance with rules, after the expiry of period of appeal/revision, if any.

 

Announced 01.09.2015

(Urvashi Agnihotri) Member

(B.M. Bedi) Judicial Member

(Nawab Singh) President

CL