NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD Vs. MOOLCHAND SINGH RATHORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is insurer. This petition has been filed under Clause (b) of Section 21 of the Consumer Protection Act. The petitioner lost before the District Forum and the State Commission.

(2.) Respondent is the complainant. He had a DCM Toyota vehicle insured with the petitioner. During the period of validity of the insurance the said vehicle was involved in accident. Respondent filed a claim with the petitioner for Rs. 2.00 lakhs as damages caused to the vehicle. Since his claim was denied, he approached the District Forum. He prayed for compensation and cost. Petitioner appointed a Surveyor to assess the damage to the vehicle and on his report passed claim of Rs. 65,000/-. However, the claim was denied on the ground that the vehicle was registered to carry five passengers apart from driver but at the time of accident there were 20 persons travelling in the vehicle of which 5 died on the spot and some were injured. It was stated that these persons were being carried for hire which was in violation of the terms and conditions of the policy. District Forum after considering the case of the parties directed the petitioner to pay Rs. 65,000/- with interest @ 12% w.e.f. 1.5.1995. A sum of Rs. 10,000/- was also awarded as compensation. In case payment was not made within a month interest would be 15% per annum.

(3.) Aggrieved, the petitioner filed appeal before the State Commission. State Commission held that there was no evidence on record to show that the accident occurred on account of excess passengers and that it was also not proved that those persons who were in the vehicle had paid any charges. Rather it was found that the persons travelling in the vehicle were relatives of the driver who were coming back after performing last rites of some deceased person when the accident took place. State Commission held that the District Forum awarded Rs. 65,000/- as damages which was the recommendation made by the petitioner itself. It, therefore, could not be said that the amount awarded was in any way arbitrary. State Commission, however, reduced the award of Rs. 10,000/- as compensation given by the District Forum to Rs. 5,000/- and reduced the interest from 15% to 12%. State Commission held that it was wrong on the part of the Insurance Company to deny the claim of the respondent. There is nothing on record for us to take a different view in exercise of our jurisdiction under Clause (b) of Section 21 of the Act. Revision petition is dismissed. Revision Petition dismissed.