NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD Vs. HABIB-UL-LAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ORDER dated 7.11.2009, passed by the learned Divisional Forum, Kashmir (hereinafter to be referred to as Forum) has been challenged in this appeal, whereby and whereunder, the complaint of respondent No. 1 was allowed and appellant was directed to indemnify the former by making payment of Rs.one lac, which was the insured peril covered under the Insurance Policy in currency. Litigation expenses were quantified at Rs. 5,000 and made payable from the appellant. The award was required to be satisfied within a period of one month from the date of order, failing which interest was payable @ 9% per annum.

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that respondent No. 1 was employed as Selection Grade Constable in Jammu and Kashmir Police Force and had Insurance cover under "Janta Personal Accidental Scheme" obtained by the State for its employees. In the year 2000, he was posted in Police Station Kupwara. On 21.12.2000, unidentified terrorists hurled grenade aimed at BSF Personnel present in the premises of main chowk of Kupwara town, which exploded on the road -side. Respondent No. 1 along with some other persons, who were present there suffered injuries from the splinters of the grenade. Respondent No. 1 remained admitted in Hospital for pretty long -time and after discharge was declared by the Medical Board as a case having 75% physical permanent disability. On 25.4.2006, respondent No. 3 (Senior Superintendent of Police) submitted the relevant record for obtaining the insured liability of respondent No. 1 to respondent No. 2, who in turn on the next date i.e. on 26.4.2006 forwarded his claim/case to the appellant for the payment of the insured liability. The appellant repudiated the claim on the ground of violation of the terms and conditions of the Insurance Policy as it was raised after 30 days from the date of incident and also had become time -barred under the relevant provision of Jammu and Kashmir Consumer Protection Act because claim was raised after two years from the date of accrual of cause of action. The learned Forum after making appraisal of the evidence adduced by respondent No. 1 and considering the averments made in the written version of respondent No. 2 and taking into account the offer made by the appellant to respondent No. 1 for reconciliation through mediation in the Lok Adalat, held it not time -barred. Consequently, the complaint was allowed and above stated reliefs were granted in favour of respondent No. 1:

(3.) THE order has been challenged inter alia on the following grounds: