NAND KISHORE JAISWAL Vs. NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) DISSATISFIED by the order of the State Commission, the Petitioner who was the complainant before the District Forum has filed this revision petition. He had taken an insurance policy for a sum of Rs. 1,65,000 in respect of 11 Rolls of Woollen Carpets and the goods were transported through Varanasi Bombay Road Lines on 2.2.1993. On 8.2.1993, the Petitioner came to know from the said transport company, that the goods and the truck have been burnt into ashes near Akola. Accordingly, on the same day he informed the Insurance Company, which appointed M/s. Kapadia Brothers as Surveyor. M/s. Kapadia Brothers conducted the survey or the spot on 16.2.1993, and ultimately after a lapse of one year and eight months, the Insurance Company offered to pay Rs. 1,07,897 and asked the insured to give in writing that the said amount was in full and final settlement and it would be only then the payment of the said amount would be made. Accordingly, the Petitioner alleged that he signed the receipt under duress.

(2.) ON 7.11.1994, the Petitioner addressed a letter stating that he has received less amount under protest instead of the claimed amount of Rs. 1,65,000 and, therefore, the balance amount may be paid to him as early as possible. This letter was duly received by the Insurance Company. As the balance amount was not paid he filed a complaint before the District Forum on 21.11.1994. After prolonged hearing for nearly three years on 6.7.1997 the District Forum directed the Insurance Company to pay the Petitioner Rs. 57,103 along with interest @ 18% per annum from 31.10.1994 to the actual date of payment along with the same interest on the total amount i.e., Rs. 1,65,000 from 2.8.1993 to 24.10.1994. In addition, the District Forum directed that Rs. 1,500 be reimbursed to the Petitioner as Surveyor's fee, Rs. 779 towards transportation charges, Rs. 7,000 towards conveyance charges and travelling expenses and Rs. 8,000 on account of physical, financial, mental agony and compensation.

(3.) DISSATISFIED by the order of the State Commission, the complainant has filed this revision petition before us. The main issue to be decided is whether the Petitioner is entitled to claim the amount of loss assessed by the Surveyor or the amount actually paid by the Insurance Company towards full and final settlement. In this connection, the complainant has informed the Insurance Company about the accident on 8.2.1993 and the Surveyor conducted the survey and estimated the damage to the tune of Rs. 1,65,000 and submitted the report on 16.2.1993 to the Insurance Company. The Insurance Company slept over the matter for 20 long months and on 24.10.1994 they offered to pay Rs. 1,07,897 towards full and final settlement. It is a well known fact that the Insurance Company will not pay the amount to that insured unless he gives a discharge voucher mentioning full and final settlement. If he writes "under protest" the Insurance Company does not pay the amount. So the complainant has not slept over the matter but raised this objection soon thereafter. When the Surveyor has himself assessed the loss at Rs. 1,65,000 we are at loss to understand why the Insurance Company further reduced the amount. Further, the report of the Surveyor is very clear which says that: