UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO LTD Vs. VIJAY KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) United India Insurance Company challenges order of District Forum, Moga dated November 4, 1997 whereby a direction was given to the appellant to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- as compensation and Rs.500/- as costs to the complainant Vijay Kumar.

(2.) Vijay Kumar had taken an Insurance Policy from United India Insurance Company covering risk of household articles which included one Television priced at Rs.50,000/-. During the currency of the policy, on January 1, 1996, when both Vijay Kumar and his wife were carrying the aforesaid T. V. upstairs, it fell down and was damaged. The Surveyor appointed by the Insurance Company determined it to be case of total loss and after considering depreciation, the loss of the T. V. was assessed at Rs.12,500/-. However, the Surveyor considering the nature of the damage caused to the T. V. observed that it appeared to be a created damage and thus recommended for repudiation of the claim. Accordingly, the Insurance Company has repudiated the claim which led the complainant to approach the District Forum. As briefly stated above, Insurance Company contested the complaint relying upon the repudiation. Both the parties led their evidence on affidavits and documents on the basis of which the impugned order was passed.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the appellant Insurance Company has argued that repudiation of the claim made in the present case was on the basis of mateiral collected through the Surveyor and it was bona fide action of the Insurance Company, hence there was no deficiency in rendering service on the part of the Insurance Company. Secondly, it has been argued that the District Forum was not justified in granting Rs.50,000/- as compensation ignoring the depreciation clause in the Insurance Policy. We have given due consideration to the aforesaid arguments. As far as first point is concerned, contention of Counsel for the Insurance Company is that in view of decision of National Commission in Shiv Trading Company V/s. New India Assurance Company Limited and Ors.,1996 2 CPJ 197, no relief can be granted to the complainant. We have perused the aforesaid judgment, however, on facts the ratio of the decision aforesaid cannot be applied to the case in hand. The question as to whether the whole story was concocted to cover up loss falsely by the complainant is dependent upon the facts and circumstances of each case. That was a case of stocks allegedly destroyed by fire and on the material collected it was found that the story of fire was manured. In the present case, it cannot be held so. The only reliance placed on the mateiral collected is on the report of the Surveyor (Ex. R-4 ). Paras 3 and 4 of this report reads as under : "3. Further to our detailed physical observations to the Television; the back side of the Television was shown badly broken and its front side showing No Impact of feeling; clearly indicates that the Television was broken with some external tool like hammer from its back and shown the damages as a result of felling of the Television which is totally fabrication of the circumstances of the loss.