Back
MADHYA PRADESH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES
REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BHOPAL
Honble Mr. Justice R.K. Varma &
Mrs. Saroj Rajwade, Member
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.—Appellant
versus
JAWAHAR LAL—Respondent
Appeal No. 762 of 1996—Decided on 29.7.1997
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Appellant:Mr. G.K. Srivastava, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Mr. Deepak Jodhani, Advocate.
An insurance company is liable to pay compensation for the theft and damage of an insured vehicle, as per the terms of the insurance policy. Delay in settlement by the insurance company may entitle the complainant to additional compensation.
Headnote:
CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT - INSURANCE - SECTION 2(1)(g) - INSURANCE POLICY - THEFT AND DAMAGE OF INSURED VEHICLE - COMPENSATION - DELAY IN SETTLEMENT - MENTAL TENSION - INTEREST - SALVAGE - CONSUMER FORUM ORDER AFFIRMED WITH MODIFICATION.
Fact of the Case:
Complainant purchased a brand new Maruti car and insured it against theft and damage. The car was stolen and later recovered in a badly damaged condition. The complainant filed a claim with the insurance company, which offered a settlement amount that was significantly lower than the estimated repair cost. The complainant filed a complaint with the District Forum, which awarded compensation to the complainant.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the insurance company had delayed and deferred a proper settlement, causing inconvenience and mental tension to the complainant. The court also found that the compensation awarded by the District Forum was just and proper.
Issues: 1. Whether the insurance company was liable to pay compensation for the theft and damage of the insured vehicle? 2. Whether the delay in settlement by the insurance company entitled the complainant to additional compensation?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the insurance company was liable to pay compensation for the theft and damage of the insured vehicle, as per the terms of the insurance policy. 2. The court held that the delay in settlement by the insurance company entitled the complainant to additional compensation, as it caused inconvenience and mental tension to the complainant.
Final Decision: The court affirmed the order of the District Forum with the modification that upon payment made by the insurance company within a month from the date of receipt of the order, the complainant shall deliver the salvage of the damaged car in question.
Mr. Justice R.K. Varma, President—This is an appeal filed by the opposite party against the order dated 24.9.1996 passed by the District Forum, Gwalior in case No. 1069/93 whereby, the District Forum has ordered the opposite parties to pay, jointly and severally, to the complainant Rs. 1,25,000/- as compensation on account of theft and damage caused to the Maruti car of the complainant with interest @ 18% per annum with effect from 29.7.1993 till payment which has been ordered to be made within one month of the order of the District Forum.
2. It is not disputed that the complainant purchased a brand new Maruti car and got himself insured in respect of the Maruti car against theft and damage on 27.10.1990 for a sum of Rs.1,25,000/- by paying premium of Rs. 2788/- A week thereafter in the night intervening 3rd and 4th January, 1991, the said Maruti Car was stolen from Khasgi Bazar, Lashkar, Gwalior. An FIR of the theft of the car was lodged by the complainant on 4.1.1991 with the Police Station, Gwalior and a copy of the FIR was sent to the opposite party No. 1 for information. The complainant then filed a claim with the opposite party No. 1 for Rs. 1,25,000/- on account of loss of the car by theft. The police could neither trace culprits nor the car and as such it gave final report accordingly on 7.8.1991 which was supplied to the opposite party on demand by them.
3. Subsequently, the complainant came to learn that the stolen car had been recovered by Police Kotwali, Jhansi and the complainant went to see the stolen car at Kotwali Police Station, Jhansi on 28.1.1992. The complainant found that the car was lying there in completely damaged condition so much so that it would be of no use to the complainant. The complainant informed the opposite party No. 1 about it on 4.2.1992 and again on 15.2.1992. On the direction of the opposite parties, the complainant gave an application to the opposite parties on 30.3.1992 for getting the survey of the car done. The opposite parties on 20.5.1992 issued a written instruction to the complainant to present the car for survey alongwith the details of repairs required. The complainant made an application to the Divisional Manager of the Insurance Company-opposite party No. 1 stating that for getting possession of the car from police custody an application is required to be made to the concerning Court for order in that behalf and that since in connection of the theft of the car the complainant had already submitted with his claim form the document of registration, the key of the car, letter of subrogation and letter of indemnity on the basis of which the opposite party No. 1 could obtain possession from Police Kotwali, Jhansi by moving an application in the concerning Court in that behalf so that the survey and other necessary formalities could be completed expeditiously for finalising the claim of the complainant for payment. But the opposite parties directed the complainant to obtain the vehicle on Supartnama and present the vehicle alongwith the estimate of repairs for final survey of the vehicle.
4. The complainant obtained possession of the Maruti car in question upon Supartnama by furnishing the necessary security on 14.10.1992 from Kotwali Police Station, Jhansi. The complainant also got the estimate of repairs prepared by Bharat Traders Mass, Jhansi on 14.10.1992, a copy of which is filed as Ex. P17 in the Forum's record. The total amount of estimate of repairs as Rs. 3,06,153/-.
5. The complainant arranged to bring the car from Jhansi to Gwalior for keeping it in Radhika Automobiles Garage for the purpose of final survey in compliance of the direction of the opposite party-Insurance Company. The complainant also submitted the estimate of repairs for Rs. 3,06,153/- prepared by Bharat Traders Mass, Jhanai. The Surveyor of the Insurance Company Shri Manohar Singh in due compliance of the direction of the opposite party-Insurance Company, called the complainant and offered him Rs. 52,521
