HARJINDER SINGH JAGIRSINGH Vs. ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this complaint, the complainant has prayed for compensation in the sum of Rs.9,47,000/- with interest @ 18% p. a. plus interest and/or tax charged by the Bank of Baroda on the loan account plus compensation in the sum of Rs.1,50,000/- for mental agony and loss of business and cost of the complaint along with direction that the opponent Insurance Company take possession of the vehicle without no objection certificate or cancellation of HPA along with further direction that the opponent Insurance Company should proceed for cancellation of registration of the vehicle in question.

(2.) Brief allegations of facts set out in the complaint are: 2 (a) The complainants purchased a chassis of truck for Rs.6,47,245/- in September 1996 and got it insured with opponent Insurance Company. It was given registration No. GJ-6-V-7660. The total cost of the vehicle including body of the truck, insurance, RTO tax, octroi and other charges was around Rs.8,50,000/-. It was insured with the opponent Insurance Company for the period from 2.9.1996 to 1.9.1997 as per the policy particulars set out in Para 4 of the complaint and Insured's Estimated Value (IEV) was approved by the opponent Insurance Company at Rs.7,97,000/-. On 22/23.6.1997, the vehicle met with an accident when it was loaded with pure terephthelic acid at Reliance Industries Limited, Mora, Bhatha, Post Surat, Hajira Road, Surat. The accident occurred when the truck was being taken in reverse direction and a part of the body of the truck came into contact with a loose live electric wire resulting into short circuit with sparks. Fire took place in the loaded material and the whole truck was burnt. FIR was lodged at Ichhapore Police Station by CR No. II 34/1997. Panchnama was also drawn. In or around June 1997, complainant lodged claim with the opponent Insurance Company and furnished all the details and documents. After about lapse of 18 months, the complainant received letter dated 15.12.1998 stating that the higher authorities settled the complainant's claim on total loss basis at Rs.3,67,500/- only and the complainant was required to send consent letter. The complainant replied the said letter on 22.12.1998 and requested the opponent Insurance Company to settle the claim for Rs.7,97,000/-. In the alternative he had shown his willingness to accept Rs.3,67,500/- keeping open his rights to recover the balance amount through appropriate legal proceedings. On 23.1.1999, a reminder was also sent but of no consequence. On 9.8.1999, notice was sent. But that was also of non-consequence. The complainant has asserted that he obtained loan of Rs.5,85,000/- from Bank of Baroda and he is required to pay interest @ 18.5% plus interest tax with quarterly rests and the outstanding amount as on 25.3.1998 was Rs.7,13,883/-. The complainant has, therefore, alleged the opponent Insurance Company is guilty of gross deficiency in service in the facts and circumstances and has prayed for the aforesaid reliefs. Along with the complaint, which was sought to be filed in the year 1999, application was filed for issuance of direction to the opponent Insurance Company for an interim award in the sum of Rs.3,67,500/- with interest @ 18.5%. As the complainant was required to repay the loan to the Bank of Baroda and as the opponent Insurance Company had already shown willingness to pay that amount, that application was given number as Civil Misc. Application No.181 of 1999 and that was disposed of and the main matter was given complaint number as stated above.

(3.) The opponent Insurance Company has resisted the claim as per the written statement Exh.6. While denying the allegations contained in the complaint, opponent Insurance Company has asserted that the IEV was bifurcated as Rs.6,47,000/- for cost of the chassis and Rs.1,50,000/- for cost of accessories, in all Rs.7,97,000/-. According to the opponent Insurance Company, the accident had taken place on account of negligence of the driver in taking the vehicle in question in reverse direction without taking due care of avoiding the accident. He had taken the truck in reverse direction in full speed resulting into the vehicle coming into contact with live electric wires. Yet, the opponent Insurance Company proceeded to accept the claim and settle it at Rs.3,67,500/- on non-standard basis. As the complainant refused such payment, there was no deficiency in service on the part of the opponent Insurance Company. The complaint is accordingly sought to be dismissed.