MANGE RAM Vs. DELHI JAL BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Stocks of the complainant/appellant of all kinds of hosiery goods, machinery and other goods were got insured for a sum of Rs. 20 lakh from United India Insurance Company Ltd., for Rs. 3,00,000 and for a sum of Rs. 8,54,000 from National Insurance Co. Ltd., Insurance Policies were taken by State Bank of Patiala, Milerganj, Ludhiana. Unfortunately on 26.5.1999 fire broke out in the premises of the appellant. Consolidated Surveyors Pvt. Ltd., were appointed as Surveyor by both the companies which assessed damage at Rs. 13,95,827 vide report dated 21.10.1999. Till July 2000 the appellant proprietor of Mahna Hosiery Works did not receive any response from the respondent. He was under severe financial hardship. The workers were threatening to drag the appellant to Labour Court for non-payment of their salaries. The bank which granted loan to the appellant also threatened to pay instalments and interest otherwise his account was to be declared NPA. These circumstances forced him to accept a sum of Rs. 5,45,827 towards the settlement of claims from both the Insurance Companies. On 1.8.2000 the United India Insurance Co. was in dominant position over the appellant and he was forced to accept Rs. 5,45,827 as against Rs. 13,95,827 assessed by Consolidated Surveyors Pvt. Ltd.

(2.) State Commission on filing complaint No. 98/00 claiming further compensation amounting to Rs. 18,54,173 along with interest @ 24% p.a. dismissed the complaint by the impugned order vide order dated 22.7.2002. Feeling aggrieved by the said order the present appeal has been filed.

(3.) We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and gone through the record. From the side of the respondent it is contended that appellant had issued full and final settlement receipts along with an affidavit accepting the amount on 1.8.2000. Cheques were issued immediately thereafter by United India Insurance Co. on 2.8.2000 and by the National Insurance Co. on 28.9.2000. The complaint was filed on 6.12.2000 i.e. after a period of four months from the date of acceptance of the cheques. Both the cheques were encashed without any protest. Full and final settlement receipts, etc. could not be ignored unless there is a strong evidence of undue influence and coercion to do so. However, it is not in dispute that notice was issued after a period of one month disputing the amount of receipts from the Insurance Company.