NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD Vs. RAIS ABBAS NAQVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS First Appeal is directed against the Order dated 6.9.93 of the Uttar Pradesh State Commission at Lucknow allowing the complaint and directing the opposite party to pay an amount of Rs. 1,10,000/- towards the claim in question along with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from 1.12.83 to the actual date of payment.

(2.) THE facts lie in a narrow compass and may be noticed. The complainant had taken an insurance policy bearing No. 832/6304256/82 for the period 31.7.82 to 30.7.83 in respect of truck bearing No. URL-1390 from National Insurance Company Ltd., appellant herein. The said truck was financed from Bank of Baroda, Kanpur and an endorsement to that effect was made in the said policy. The said financier in their letter dated 9.6.83 stated that the said truck bearing No. URL-1390 had met with an accident. The appellant on the receipt of the letter dated 9.6.83 arranged spot survey of the vehicle. The Insurance Company had got the spot survey conducted and thereafter the final survey at Kanpur and the reports were submitted by the said Surveyors. During the course of survey, the complainant submitted a copy of the goods receipt in respect of the goods which were being carried in the said truck at the time when the accident took place. As per the goods receipt, the goods which were loaded were 118.70 quintals. While the claim was under process, a claim was also received from the owners of the goods as the same were also insured under Marine Insurance Policy with the appellant-Insurance Company. The said claim was filed by the consignor M/s. New Light Tannery under the Marine Insurance Policy. In the said claim, the total weight of the consignment was shown at 15 tones. The Insurance Company in view of the two different goods receipts which had been issued by the same Transporter namely Rashtraco Freight Carriers which was of the same date i.e. 28.5.83 and in view of different versions and different goods receipt which were received by the Insurance Company from the two insured persons under two separate policies, the Insurance Company got an investigation done. According to the appellant herein Shri K.P. Singh, Investigator submitted his report on 11.11.91 wherein he reiterated that the goods receipt submitted by the complainant was not issued by the Carriers and the Carriers had confirmed that the goods receipt was not issued by them and it was also confirmed that the goods receipt filed by the consignor M/s. New Light Tannery was a genuine goods receipt. The Insurance Company, based on die investigation reports, repudiated the claim in their letter dated 6.2.92 alleging that the vehicle was parsed for carriage of 12 tones only by the Registering Authority and that the goods receipt submitted by the insured was not a genuine one and the weight carried by the vehicle at the time of accident was 15 tones as against the goods receipt submitted by the insured of 11.87 tones. The complainant thereafter filed the complaint claiming a sum of Rs. 2,25,000/- for damage to the vehicle and for compensation under the said policy and also claimed interest at the rate of 18% per annum on the amount of the claim.

(3.) WE have heard the learned Counsel for the appellant and have also gone through the records. The finding of the State Commission that the terms and conditions of the policy have not been filed is perverse and is contrary to the record. Shri D. Sarkar, Administrative Officer of the National Insurance Company, Regional Officer, Lucknow had filed an affidavit and annexed with it a true copy of the policy in question in three leaves and true copy of the registration particulars of Vehicle No. URL 1390 in one leaf. The policy of insurance lays down limitation as to the use. The licenced carrying capacity of the said vehicle for the goods is 12 tones. Under limitation as to the use, the policy also lays down that the vehicle is to be used under a public carriers' permit within the meaning of the Motor Vehicles Act. The registration certificate also shows that the carrying capacity of the goods vehicle is 12 tones. The Bank of Baroda in their letter dated 16th August, 1983 wrote to the Insurance Company that the said vehicle met with an accident on 7th June, 1983 at Indore and fell into a ravine resulting in spot death of two drivers and one cleaner and total damage to truck. It is thus an admitted case of the complainant as well as the Bank of Baroda that the truck fell into a ravine. Inference from this factual position is possible that the damage was caused by overloading of the vehicle. The Insurance Company had repudiated the liability based on the investigation report submitted by the Investigator as well as the claim filed by the consignor M/s. New Light Tanery under the Marine Insurance Policy wherein the total weight of the consignment was shown at 15 tonnage. The decision taken by the Insurance Company in repudiating the claim was thus based on material and cannot be termed as arbitrary. The State Commission was thus not right that the repudiation letter dated 6.2.92 is deficient and for that reason to set aside the repudiation letter dated 6.2.92. Once the Insurance Company has taken the decision after detailed consideration of the cause of accident, and whether there has been breach of the conditions of the public carriers' permit under which the vehicle was being plied at the time of the accident, it is not open for the Consumer FORA to substitute its opinion for the opinion of the Insurance Company. It is for the complainant to have his remedies by of a suit to challenge the repudiation made by the Insurance Company. There is no deficiency in service of the Insurance Company in coming to the conclusion on the facts of this case for the repudiation of their liability. For the above reasons, the appeal is allowed, the impugned order is set aside. It will be open to the complainant to seek his remedies in Civil Court or other appropriate proceedings.