JAIGIRI GOSWAMINT Vs. ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal under Sec.15 of theis directed against the order dated 7.3.2006 in Complaint No.28/2004, passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Jagdalpur (hereinafter called the "district Forum" for short) whereby the complaint was dismissed.

(2.) Brief facts necessary for the disposal of this appeal are that the complainant had obtained insurance for his vehicle Sumo bearing registration No. CG-17-D-0313 for the period from 1.10.2003 to 30.9.2004 and during the subsistence of insurance the vehicle met with an accident on 17.12.2003. It was averred in the complaint that the said vehicle met with an accident when some acquaintances of the complainant were carrying dead body in the vehicle. It was further averred that the persons sitting in the vehicle were injured and the complainant had given intimation of accident to Bhanpuri Police Station and had went to Jagdalpur and got the vehicle repaired. The cost of repair was Rs.2,81,735. The complainant laid claim before the insurer. The insurer had appointed Surveyor but had subsequently repudiated the claim on 13.8.2004 on the ground that at the time of accident the vehicle was being plied as taxi in violation of terms of policy. Hence, the complainant filed the complaint with a prayer for payment of Rs.2,81,735 towards cost of repairs and Rs.25,000 towards mental shock together with interest calculated @ 18% p. a. It was averred in the complaint that the repudiation of the claim by the insurer amounts to deficiency in service.

(3.) The respondent resisted the complainant and denied various allegation in the written version filed on their behalf. It was averred that the insurer had appointed Surveyor who found during investigation that the persons carrying the dead body in the vehicle at the time of accident had paid Rs.18,000 towards fare for the vehicle. It was further averred that the vehicle was registered as private vehicle but at the relevant time it was being used for hire and reward. In the circumstances repudiation of the claim by the insurer did not amount to deficiency in service. It was further averred that the complainant had filed exaggerated claim. The Surveyor has assessed the loss at Rs.2,24,479 but in view of the facts and circumstances of the case even the sum assessed by the Surveyor was not payable.