LAWS(NCD)-2008-4-49

BABULAL AGRAWAL Vs. ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LTD

Decided On April 29, 2008
BABULAL AGRAWAL Appellant
V/S
ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LTD Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE unsuccessful complainant in CD Case No. 23 of 2000 of the District Forum, Bargarh has filed this appeal challenging the orders dated 6. 9. 2001 in the said CD case, as per which the District Forum has dismissed the complaint petition being devoid of merit, there being no cause of action and the complaint case has been filed beyond the period of limitation without necessary explanation to that effect.

(2.) THE facts in brief are that the complainant/appellant filed the aforesaid CD case to direct the sole opposite party/respondent to pay insurance claim of Rs. 1,96,000 with interest @ 18% per annum from 15. 2. 1997 till realization of the said amount, Rs. 25,000 towards loss of business, harassment and mental agony and Rs. 3,000 towards cost of litigation, in total a sum of Rs. 2,24,000. His case is that he has purchased and used Tata-709 bearing registration No. OR-17-8465 for earning his livelihood by self-employment. The vehicle was insured with the opposite party from 10. 9. 1996 to 9. 9. 1997. Unfortunately, the said vehicle met with an accident on 15. 11. 1997. He intimated about the same to the opposite party and lodged claim before him supplying all the required documents. But the opposite party neither settled the claim nor repudiated the claim. Therefore, complainant filed the CD case claiming aforesaid amount alleging deficiency of service by the opposite party.

(3.) AFTER entering into appearance, the opposite party vide his written version stated that the complaint is barred by limitation and the complainant is not entitled to any claim, the vehicle being driven by a driver holding fake licence contrary to the condition of the policy in question. It is stated by the opposite party that soon after receipt of information about the accident, he had deputed a Surveyor. On the aforesaid ground viz. as the driver-Anand Kumar Pradhan was driving the vehicle possessing a fake driving licence, opposite party had repudiating the claim of the complainant sent a letter dated 18. 5. 1998 by registered post with A/d. Thus, the opposite party had claimed for dismissal of the CD case, he having not caused any negligence or deficiency in service in repudiating the claim.