RAVI BHUSHAN Vs. UNITED INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The unsuccessful complainant appeals against the order of the District Forum, Gurgaon filing the complaint preferred by him and relegating him to the ordinary remedy at law.

(2.) The facts and merits are in the narrowest compass and may be noticed with utmost brevity. The appellant had obtained an insurance cover note of rupees one lac against theft and fire with regard to his cloth shop from the respondent - United India Insurance Company Ltd. During the period of the coverage of risk a theft has alleged to have been taken place in the shop during the night intervening 12th and 13th of December, 1990. A report with regard thereto was lodged with the Police Station on the following day on the 14th of December, 1990. Thereafter the complainant lodged his claim to the tune of Rs.83,000/- with the Insurance Company.

(3.) It would appear that the respondent with diligence appointed a Surveyor and loss assessor who after full investigation reported that the value of the stolen goods was Rs.12,790/-. A cheque for the said amount was sent to the appellant, though the record is somewhat silent thereupon. It would appear that he willingly accepted the same. The complaint was filed on the 5th of February, 1992 for claiming the balance amount of the insurance claim lodged by the appellant.4. The District Forum took the view that the question of the precise quantum of the loss could only be determined with regard to the nature and quantity of goods lying in the shop prior to the theft and what remained after the said incident. It opined that this would involve an inchtape enquiry with regard to the difference betwixt the assessed amount by the Surveyor as also the stock in hand etc. On the basic holding that determining the issue involved complicated questions and examination of evidence, the appellant was relegated to approach the proper authorities for relief.5. Mr. Sudhir Aggarwal, the learned Counsel for the appellant persistently argued that the District Forum was obliged to dispose of the question on merils and determine the precise quantum of loss what ever be complexity. Reliance was placed on Lt. Col. B. N. Sharma V/s. M/s. S. T. P. Limited,1992 2 CPC 507 Sharda Ben and Ors. V/s. Gujarat Gas Supplier and Ors.,1992 2 CPC 396. We are afraid that there is not even a medium of merit in the aforesaid submission. What first meets the eye is the fact that herein no blatant deficiency in the service of instance extended out to the complaint could be pointed out by the learned Counsel for the appellant. It is not in dispute that on the lodging of the complaint a Surveyor and loss assessor was appointed. He went into the matter and assessed the loss in detail at a sum of Rs.12,790/-. Accepting that report the said amount was duly tendered by the respondent-insurer and apparently accepted. Once that is so, it would appear that on the allegations of the complainant appellant there would remain no patent deficiency of service at all within the consumer jurisdiction. The appellant, therefore, would have to be non-suited on that ground alone.7. Altogether apart from the above, we are unable to disagree with the forth right view expressed by the District Forum. As observed by it the detailed quantum of loss could only be arrived at by first quantifying the value of goods lying in the shop before the theft and thereafter compute what had allegedly remained thereafter and thus determine the balance. Inevitably in a contested Lis this would involve the leading of sizeable evidence on either side to arrive at a precise computation of the value of the goods. This has to be viewed against a firm assessment made by the Surveyor which is substantially at variance with the tall claim of Rs.83,000/- raised by the complainant. In this context no fault can possibly be found with the District Forum in staying its hand and leaving the matter of the disputed balance amount for determination by the Civil Court.8. The aforesaid judgment relied upon by the learned Counsel do not in any way aid or advance his case. There is no quarrel with the legal proposition laid down by the National Commission which obviously are of a binding nature. However, the question whether a particular lis would involve complicated questions of law and facts and merits the adducing of the exhaustive evidence on either side is one primarily of fact. As already noticed we are one with the view taken by the District Forum and no inflexible rule can be laid down that the District Forum must decide the case on merits irrespective of its complexity or the mass of evidence required for its determination.9. For the foregoing reasons this appeal must fail and is hereby dismissed. However, we decline to burden the consumer-appellant with any costs.