NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD Vs. PUSHPA CHHABRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE complaint filed by the respondent/complainant for compensation in relation to the accident of the vehicle insured with the petitioner/OP was rejected by the District Forum vide order dated 2.9.2003. Against the said order, appeal was filed by the complainant in the State Commission. The State Commission directed the Insurance Company to pay compensation of Rs. 1,08,016 towards cost of spare parts purchased by the complainant apart from Rs. 9,100 allowed earlier by way of compensation including cost towards litigation along with interest @ 12% p.a. from the date of filing of the complaint till its realization. This order has been challenged by the petitioner/Insurance Company in this revision.

(2.) HEARD Counsel appearing on both sides. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted before us that occurrence of the accident itself is doubtful inasmuch as reliance was placed on Daily Diary Entry No. 627/96 which pertained to another truck and it was only subsequently that another Daily Diary Entry was sought to be produced in connection with the accident in question as also the report of the police dated 30.6.1998 on Daily Diary Entry No. 205/98 dated 10.4.1998 of Police Station, Jhumri Telaya. Learned Counsel for the petitioner also drew our attention to the report of surveyor, Engineer H.S. Singh on the strength of which it is urged that the factum of accident and damage to the vehicle has not been proved. He, therefore, contends that the revision be allowed. On the other hand, learned Counsel for the respondent/complainant referred to the report of Surveyor, Ranjit Kumar Singh as also the spot survey by Mr. A. Ghose, Surveyor and the report filed by the Manager of the complainant with Police Station, Jhumri Telaya dated 28.5.1996 as Station Diary Entry No. 205 dated 10.4.1998. According to him, not only the accident has been duly established, but also the damage and the State Commission has very rightly allowed the claim, which does not call for interference.

(3.) WE have gone through the record. In order to prove the accident, the complainant had relied upon the report made to the police vide S.D. Entry No. 627/96 dated 28.5.1996 to the Police In-charge of Jhumri Telaya Police Station. However, during the course of investigation by the Insurance Company, it was found that S.D Entry No. 627/96 pertains to complaint in respect of another truck No. WMH-868. Subsequently, the complainant sought to produce another S.D. Entry dated 28.5.1996, which according to the complainant was 627/96. The complainant also relied upon DD Entry No. 205/98 in respect of a complaint made by the complainant to Police Station, Jhumri Telaya on 4.7.1998 as also certificate dated 30.6.1998 issued by Officer In-charge, P.S. Jhumri Telaya stating that after enquiry into the incidence of accident which took place on 28.5.1996 it was found to be correct. There are major discrepancies if we compare the two S.D. Entries i.e. one which relates to Truck No. WMH-868 and other which relates to Dumper Triper No. BR-13G-9163 of the vehicle in respect of which, claim for compensation was filed by the complainant. The S.D. Entry relating to Dumper No. BR-13G-9163 appears to be manipulated document inasmuch as out of three-digit entry No. in the first digit there is overwriting and the digits which are visible are 27/90 dated 28.5.1996. The seals of the Police Station used on the two S.D. Entries Annexure P-1 and P-2 of the same date filed along with the revision are totally different. One is round seal and the other is oval. Moreover, both the S.D. Entries cannot be obviously have the same number i.e. 627/96 dated 28.5.1996. It appears that the complainant had in fact approached the Police Station subsequently in respect of which, DD Entry No. 205/98 dated 10.4.1998 was recorded by the Police Station, Jhumri Telaya and after investigating into the said DD Entry a report was given by the Officer In-charge, PS: Jhumri Telaya on 30.6.1998 that the accident had in fact taken place on 28.5.1996.