PALWINDER KAUR Vs. ORIENTAL INSU. CO. LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal was heard on 17.7.2009 and is listed today for dictating orders. Appellant is aggrieved from the order passed by District Forum, Una in Consumer Complaint No.156 /2007. By means of impugned order complaint filed by the appellant has been dismissed solely on the ground, that the condition regarding limitation as to use contained in cover note Annexure C -3 filed by the appellant (its copy is Annexure R -3) was violated.

(2.) BEFORE dealing with the merits of this case it may be appropriate to mention here, that vehicle being insured on 4.10.2006 when mishap occurred and as a result, it caught fire due to sudden blast of cylinder is not in dispute. FIR No. 92/2006 was registered regarding this incident is again established. Surveyor was appointed on receipt of information by the respondent -Insurance Company. Report of the surveyor is Annexure R -1. In accordance with this report, appellant is entitled to Rs. 60,578/ -, whereas according to the appellant he had spent a sum of Rs. 1,31,600/ -. Another fact that needs to be noted here is that the appellant had also approached the Ombudsman of Insurance Company at Chandigarh and his claim was rejected on 14.6.2007. This dismissal was also bad in law according to her. After rejection of her claim, complaint was filed with a prayer to allow Rs. 1,31,600/ - alongwith 9% interest as well as compensation in the sum of Rs. 20,000/ - besides Rs. 5,000/ - as litigation cost.

(3.) AFTER having heard learned counsel for the parties, as also having examined the cover note Annexure C -3 as well as its copy Annexure R -3, we are of the view that this was not a case of either organized racing or speed testing. We are further of the view that the view taken by District Forum below by invoking limitation as to use as contained in the two referred Annexures was wholly inapplicable to the facts and circumstances of this case. This clause has been wrongly invoked by the District Forum below.