ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LTD Vs. BACHHU DEBNATH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition is directed against the order passed by the Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Tripura dated 18.4.1996 in Appeal No. 37/95. In order to appreciate the controversy involved in this case, the facts relevant for the purpose may be stated as under: The complainant, Mr. Bachhu Debnath purchased a truck bearing No. TRL 3981 on taking loan from the Indian Overseas Bank, Agartala Branch, Agartala. The vehicle was insured with the Insurance Company for a sum of Rs. 3,70,000/-. On 5.3.1995, the truck met with an accident. As a result of the accident, the vehicle was damaged to a great extent. As the vehicle was insured with the opposite party-Insurance Company they were informed about the accident. The opposite party appointed a Surveyor who after inspection of the vehicle submitted his report on 15.3.1995. The vehicle was, thereafter, brought to the garage and after estimation it was found that an amount of Rs. 3,10,031.50 would be required for rectifying the defects. The vehicle was dismantled in presence of another Surveyor and it was estimated that a sum Rs. 1,43,966.77 would be required in addition to the estimate, which was done earlier. The complainant demanded a sum of Rs. 4,53,988.27 from the opposite party for repairing the vehicle. When he did not get any favorable response from the opposite party, he approached the District Forum seeking redress by filing a complaint.

(2.) In the written version filed on behalf of the Insurance Company, it was pleaded that the complainant was not entitled to claim Rs. 4,53,988.27 plus Rs. 15,000/- per month as dam- ages. It was also pleaded that the respondent was not entitled to get any relief as the policy was void for non-disclosure of some material facts. It was also contended that in no way the respondent would be entitled to get such an amount as according to the terms of the policy, the deduction rate for depreciation of a vehicle of 1990-95 model stood at 35%. The Surveyor, Mr. Gurcharan Singh who was engaged by the appellant estimated the loss and opined for a cash loss of Rs. 1,44,521.12.

(3.) After hearing the Counsel for the parties and appreciating the documentary evidence produced on record, the District Forum came to the conclusion that there was deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party and awarded the complainant a sum of Rs. 3,70,000/- as value of the truck and Rs. 8.300/- per month as business loss from the date of accident till payment.