ARVIND LAL Vs. ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the order dated 13.12.2003 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Rajnandgaon (hereinafter referred to as 'district Forum' for short) in Complaint Case No.67/2003 whereby the complaint was dismissed.

(2.) BRIEF facts as narrated in the complaint are that the complainant had purchased a Marshal Jeep mainly for the purpose of taking his disabled wife to the hospital and for other domestic use. The complainant had got his aforesaid jeep bearing No. M. P.13/c -4735 (New No. C. G.07/z. D -6314 comprehensively insured from the opposite party/respondent for the period from 29.11.2001 to 28.11.2002. It is averred in the complaint that the complainant was acquainted with some of the Commercial Tax Inspectors posted at Potekohra, near Chichola and one of them Sri Teekam Das Verma, Inspector, Commercial Tax borrowed the jeep on 27.11.2002 for attending the marriage of the daughter with his colleagues. Due to personal relations with Sri Verma, the complainant had lent the said vehicle (without charging any fare) on the condition that Mr. Verma would bear the expenses for fuel (diesel ). While the aforesaid Sri Verma was returning from Raipur to Chichola, after attending the marriage, the jeep met with an accident near village Tendunala at about 1.00 a. m. on 28.11.2002. It is further averred that the aforesaid accident took place during subsistence of the insurance and all the persons aboard the car, except the driver, had died, FIR was loged and criminal case was registered against the driver. It is also averred that the jeep was totally damaged and the complainant had duly intimated the insurer regarding the accident and had also filed a claim for Rs.3,38,000 on the basis of estimate given by National Motor Works, Chichola, Distt. Rajnandgaon. The insurer got the matter investigated through Surveyor. However, the insured repudiated the claim on flimsy ground that the vehicle was being used for commercial purpose. Hence the complainant had filed the complaint before the District Forum for deficiency in service on part of the insurer and had claimed a sum of Rs.3,38,000. The complainant, besides filing his own affidavit, had also filed affidavits of various independent witnesses.

(3.) IN the written version the opposite party admitted the insurance of the jeep, denied various averments made in the complaint especially that of deficiency in service and specifically averred that the jeep was being used for commercial purpose, hence the claim was repudiated. The opposite party had submitted affidavit of Mr. P. C. Kuldeep, Branch Manager, Rajnandgaon.