NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs. RAJESH TRIPATHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal against the order and judgment dated 10.11.1993 passed by the District Consumer Forum, Lakhimpur in Complaint No.38/1991. The facts of the case, stated in brief, are that vehicle No. UP-31 9057 was insured with the National Insurance Company - opposite party, for Rs.1,31,000/-. This Ambassador Car met with an accident, on 22nd of January 1990 at about 9 p. m. The information about the accident was conveyed to the Insurance Company on 25th January, 1990. Before that, on the date of accident, First Information Report was also lodged. The Insurance Company appointed a Surveyor who visited the spot on 25.1.1990. Thereafter second Surveyor' for assessment of damages was appointed on 21.2.1990 who inspected the vehicle and submitted his report on 10th April, 1990. He recommended a claim of Rs.53,675/- only which amount was paid accordingly by the Insurance Company. Now the claimant has said that in presence of one Farid Ahmed, who was owner of Dilli Motor Garage, Krishna Kumar and Others, the agent had settled the claim for Rs.70,000/-. It is further mentioned that it was also agreed upon that in case engine and gear box of this vehicle was found defective, then a supplementary report may also be submitted and the balance is to be paid to the complainant. According to complainant he consented to this amount, but when the Surveyor submitted his report only claim of Rs.53,675/- was forwarded. This amount is inadequate and the complainant had filed objections to the effect that Surveyor should be sent again and a supplementary report should be called for. The Surveyor was not again sent and hence complainant got the vehicle repaired and the information of this was conveyed to the Insurance Company on 6.3.1991. The list of damaged parts is given in Annexure-II to the complaint which were replaced.

(2.) It is further alleged that depreciation at the rate of 10% has been deducted as the vehicle met with an accident within six months of its purchase and no deduction on account of depreciation is to be made. The amount has not been paid and a further claim of Rs.46,312/- in addition to the assessment made by the Surveyor has been claimed.

(3.) The opposite party, Insurance Company, has in its written statement, alleged that the vehicle was got immediately inspected on the spot after information of the accident was received, Thereafter, the final survey was got done. The Surveyor reported a loss of Rs.53,657/- which was allowed by the Insurance Company. It is alleged that the Surveyor never offered settlement of Rs.70,000/- as alleged by the claimant. According to the Insurance Company the cheque was sent but it was not accepted by the complainant.