ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD Vs. JITENDRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) REVISION Petition No. 685 of 2012 has been filed under section 21 (b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 for setting aside the order dated 9.8.2011, passed by Rajasthan State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Circuit Bench at Jodhpur (short, "State Commission") in First Appeal No.193 of 2010.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case as per respondent/complainant is that he filed a consumer complaint against petitioners/opposite parties that he got comprehensive policy no.3003/52630179/00/000 for this LP truck no.RJ -19 -GA -7037. In the said insurance policy, for damages against respondent himself, responsibility equivalent to the cost of truck was also accepted and the respondent had paid the premium to the petitioners. During the period of insurance on 24.11.2007, when respondent's driver was going from Sayla to Merta, in midnight at about 1.30 a.m., having loaded sacks filled with cotton, which he had taken from agricultural farm of one Narayan Ram Gurjar, of Village Sayla, Tehsil Bhopalgarh. When the said truck reached Gotan, at about 4.00 a.m., as soon entered in Gotan town, due to unknown reasons the sacks filled with cotton caught fire all of sudden, then the driver immediately took the truck, out of the town and tried to get it overturned but as the vehicle came off the road, it got stuck in sand and did not overturn. To extinguish fire, he informed Magarpalika Mandal, Merta, who sent fire brigades, who could not control fire despite best efforts and cotton sacks loaded in the truck got burnt. Report to the said incident was lodged by driver in Police Station Gotan. Respondent filed his claim before the petitioner insurance company but they repudiated the said claim on 27.5.2008, saying that the said incident of fire outburst occurred due to grave negligence on the part of respondent and thus, claim is not payable. Hence, respondent has prayed a sum of Rs.7,45,180/ - for damages to sacks along with interest @ 18% per annum and Rs.20,000/ - for damages.

(3.) PETITIONER insurance company has replied that fire broke out due to gross negligence of respondent. They have submitted that cotton sacks were exceeding 21/2 feet from the height ascertained thus, the said sacks caught fire from the electricity wires and were burnt. It was due to gross negligence on the part of the respondent and as such, the claim has been correctly repudiated. They have not committed any deficiency in service. Hence, it was prayed that complaint should be dismissed. District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Jodhpur, Rajasthan, vide their order dated 25.6.2010, accepted the complaint with the following directions ;