REGIONAL MANAGER Vs. ANANT KUMAR & ANR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Vide the present revision petition, the petitioner, who was opposite party No.2 in complaint No.168/2017 filed by respondent No.1, has challenged the order dated 23rd July, 2018 in First Appeal No.714/2018 whereby his appeal against the order of the District Forum dated 6th February, 2018, was dismissed. The impugned order is challenged on two grounds firstly that the complainant had not raised any claim from them and secondly that since the vehicle was insured with two insurance companies, both the insurance companies had to contribute towards the loss and the petitioner cannot be held solely liable to redeem the loss.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that the complainant had bought a truck which he insured with the petitioner for the period 11th May, 2015 to 10th May, 2016. He had alleged that in the month of April, 2016, he presumed that the validity of the insurance with the petitioner had expired. He had further alleged that he had lost the policy issued by the petitioner and, therefore, there was no occasion for him to verify whether the policy was valid or not. Thinking that the policy period had expired, he purchased another policy on 23rd April, 2016 from respondent No.2 i.e. National Insurance Co. His truck caught fire in an accident on 29th April, 2016 and he lodged DD report No.19 on the same very day with P.S. Sadar, Sonepat. His case is that he informed both respondent No.1 & 2 about this fact and filed a claim to the tune of Rs.16,26,055/-. When his claim was not considered, he served a legal notice upon respondent No.2, who in its reply submitted that there was no liability to redeem the loss on its part since the vehicle was already insured with the petitioner and that the second policy of the same vehicle could not be issued because of the existing insurance policy which was valid and that the petitioner solely was responsible to indemnity the loss. Thereafter, the complainant sent legal notice dated 10th March, 2017 to the petitioner claiming payment of Rs.16,26,055/- but it was not replied by the petitioner. The petitioner had taken the stand before the District Forum that since they were not informed of the accident, they could not do the investigation to go into the actual value of the alleged damage and that since the vehicle was insured with National Insurance Company, the insurance company is also liable equally.

(3.) After perusing the evidences of the parties and hearing the arguments of learned counsel for the parties, the District Forum rejected the contentions of the petitioner and has held as under: -