RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. Vs. SHYAM BANSAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition has been filed by the petitioner against order dated 22.9.2014 passed by the learned State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Haryana (in short, 'the State Commission'), in First Appeal No. 801 of 2014, Reliance General Insurance Co. Vs. Shyam Bansal , by which appeal was dismissed.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that the complainant/respondent is owner of vehicle No. DL-8CNA-0466 and the same was insured with the opposite party/petitioner vide Policy No. 110000609255 for Rs. 5,00,000 for the period from 19.10.2010 to 18.10.2011. Vehicle met with an accident on 14.2.2011 and damaged badly. Complainant immediately intimated the opposite party/petitioner about the accident, submitted his claim and also submitted all the necessary documents with the opposite party. Opposite party deputed the surveyor who assessed the loss but the opposite party had sent a letter dated 25.5.2011 vide which the claim of the complainant has been denied on the ground that there is violation of policy's terms and conditions of policy. Alleging deficiency on the part of the opposite party, complainant filed complaint before District Forum. Opposite party resisted complaint admitted the fact of insurance and loss to the vehicle, but denied that the vehicle was totally damaged, it was averred that the surveyor was appointed by the answering opposite party showing the liability of the insured to the amount of Rs. 2,68,855 which was not paid for the reasons that the complainant had sold the vehicle in question on 5.8.2009 to Shri Anil Nagpal s/o Shri A.K. Nagpal and in this regard the contract/delivery receipt was issued by All India Car Dealers Association on 5.8.2009 duly signed by the complainant and purchaser of the vehicle and the vehicle was handed over to Shri Anil Nagpal. Denying any deficiency on their part in repudiating claim they prayed for dismissal of complaint. Learned District Forum after hearing both the parties, allowed complaint and directed opposite party to pay Rs. 2,68,855 with 9% p.a. interest along with Rs. 2,000 as litigation expenses. Appeal filed by opposite party was dismissed by learned State Commission vide impugned order, against which this revision petition has been filed along with application for condonation of delay.

(3.) Heard learned Counsel for the parties finally at admission stage and perused record