(1.) This is the defendant's appeal against the judgment and decree of the learned single Judge dt. 8-4-1987, decreeing the suit with costs and future interest.
(2.) The plaintiff-respondent filed a suit against the defendant-appellant for recovery of Rs.3,75,000/- on the allegation that his truck No. 2486-JKQ which was insured with the defendant-appellant vide Motor Insurance Policy No. 6301720/81, as renewed from time to time, for an amount of Rs. 2,50,000/-, met with an accident on 3-2-1983 on the Jammu- Srinagar, national highway. That, as a result of the accident, the truck rolled down from the road and resulted in total loss. That the plaintiff-respondent informed the defendant appellant about the accident and laid his claim in terms of the insurance policy. According to the plaintiff-respondent the truck in question had been purchased by him for an amount of Rs. 2,44,000/-. He has spent another amount of Rs. 15,000/- for preparing its body. For the purchase of the truck, the plaintiff-respondent had obtained loan from J. and K. Bank after executing a hire purchase agreement with the Bank.
(3.) The case of the plaintiff-respondent further is that the defendant-appellant had deputed surveyor to assess the loss and even a surveyor from Delhi was directed to make the assessment but with a view to deny the claim of the defendant-appellant, the assessment was not got made. According to him a legal notice had been served on the defendant-appellant on 7-3-1983 to pay up the insurance claim, but despite the service of the notice, the claim had not been paid up. The plaintiff-respondent alleged that because of the total loss of the vehicle he had suffered a loss of more than Rs. 2,59,000/- but since the insurance liability was only to the extent of Rs. 2,50,000/- he was claiming only that amount together with interest @ 18% from the date of notice till the filing of the suit on 4-1-1986, which was worked out at Rs. 1,25, 500/-. Besides, interest pendente lite and future interest @ 18% per annum, till the realisation of the decretal amount was also claimed.