MOHAMMAD SHAFI SOFI Vs. NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the order dated 1-10-1997 of JandK State Consumer's Protection Commission, Srinagar (hereafter for short State Commission) dismissing appellant's claim in complaint No. 324 /96 on the file of State Commission.

(2.) Appellants' case before State Commission was that their vehicle with registration mark and number JKC- 4865 was covered by insurance policy for a sum of Rs.2.50 lacs for the period commencing from 22-12-1987 to 21-12-1988. During subsistence of insurance policy, the vehicle met an accident on 17-2-1988 at Barindi Brahmina, Tehsil Uri, District Baramulla. The vehicle was total loss after it fell in river Jehlum. The State Commission, after taking complaint on record,issued notice to opposite party (O.P.), who filed written statement. The parties led evidence. The State Commission on hearing parties dismissed the complaint.

(3.) We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and examined the record. The State Commission has concluded on the evidence and material placed before it that the vehicle has been deliberately thrown in the river Jehlum with a view to make out a case for grabbing sum assured for utilisation towards repayment of loan raised to finance the vehicle from the Bank. To reach this conclusion, State Commission has relied on the report of preliminary surveyor and loss assessor Shri Baljinder Singh, report of Jehlum Investigating Agency, the final report of Police Investigating Agency in FIR 11 of 1988 registered at P/S Uri in respect of occurrence in question and non-availability of hospital record regarding alleged hospitalisation and treatment of the driver of ill-fated vehicle. From record, it is seen that Shri Baljinder Singh, Surveyor and Loss Assessor went to the spot immediately and inquired about the matter. On inquiry he got suspicious and asked for a detailed investigation which was entrusted to Jehlum Investigating Agency Pvt. Ltd. This agency on investigation found the claim spurious and put forth only to cheat Insurance Company and recommended that the claim may be repudiated. The final report in FIR 11 of 1988 (supra) also speaks of the claim as not genuine, but made to indemnify the financiers qua the outstanding liability against the claimants. Though the driver of the vehicle one Lal Din in his deposition before the Forum has stated that he sustained injuries but escaped the death and was hospitalised for two days, yet no record, may be even certificate or a memo showing his hospitalisation and extending medical attendance in a hospital, has been produced before or made available to the State Commission. The State Commission has on detailed analysis and appreciatation of evidence and material placed before it, found that the occurrence in question cannot be said to be an accident. Throwing vehicle in Jehlum river was intentional and a planned act with a view to grab monetary benefits, cheat the Insurance Company and get rid of usless vehicle, otherwise a junk. From the tell tale facts, total evidence and material and chain of circumstances, on record, the conclusion reached by the State Commission is fully covered by 'preponderance of probabilities', norm laid for proof in such cases.