IMPORTANT POINT
Insurance claim can be rejected on ground of over loading of vehicle.

Mrs. Rekha Gupta, Presiding Member—The present Revision Petition No.2479 of 2014 has been filed against the judgment dated 31.03.2014 of the Rajasthan State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Jaipur (‘the State Commission’) in Appeal no. 1262 of 2012.

2. The brief facts of the case as per the respondent/complainant are that the respondent has insured her vehicle bearing number RJ 14 2G 6141 with a validity period from 30.06.2006 to 29.06.2007. The said vehicle met with an accident on 12.03.2007 and the first information report was lodged. The respondent’s vehicle was totally damaged in the said accident. The respondent had submitted a claim of Rs.9.21,203/- towards the loss suffered by her and Rs.1,90,000/- towards the estimation of the construction of the cabin to the insurance company. On the assurance of the insurance company, the respondent got the vehicle repaired at a cost of Rs.4,48,544/- and presented the same before the insurance company for the payment of the claim. The insurance company had rejected the claim of the respondent on 23.04.2008 on the ground of over loading of the goods in the vehicle. Hence, the complaint was filed claiming Rs.5,88,694/- towards the loss suffered on the truck and Rs.2,00,000/- towards the mental agony suffered by the respondent.

3. The petitioner/ opposite party/ insurance company had filed its objection by stating therein that the claim can be paid only as per the terms and conditions of the insurance policy. After the accident, the survey and investigation of the vehicle was conducted. The investigator had stated that he had verified the royalty receipt dated 11.03.2007 issued by Shri Vinod Garg, Royalty Contractor, Makrana. Mr Garg had stated that the receipt was not available on his records and appeared to be forged. The verification of the GR no. 10 dated 11.03.2007 issued by M/s Padmavati Transport Company was made and it was found that the bilty produced before the insurance company had also been forged by concealing the actual quantity of the loaded goods. The Padmavati Transport Company had stated that on 11.03.2007, 41,940 qunitals of marble stones were loaded on the vehicle for transportation from Makrana to Lakeri Cements. During the time of the accident of the said truck, it was loaded with 41.940 quintals of goods, instead of its normal capacity of 16.200 quintals of goods. Hence, the respondent had deliberately violated the terms and conditions of the insurance policy. The claim of the respondent had been correctly rejected. Hence, the complaint should be dismissed.

4. The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum – III, Jaipur vide impugned order dated 05.09.2012 while dismissing the complaint observed that:

“It is revealed from the perusal of the RC that the weight of the empty vehicle is 8970 kgs and its inclusive loading capacity is 25,000/- kgs. It is, therefore, clear the loading capacity of the vehicle is 16 quintals. In this case the opposite party had filed the report submitted by the Surveyor Sanjay Kumar Jain and the investigator Shri B B Rai which has been perused by us. The vehicle weight slip dated 11.03.2007 issued by Shri Vinod Garg, the Royalty Contractor has been filed as Annexure 7 stating the weight of the vehicle to be 14,900 kilogram. But Shir Rameshwar Lal had stated that the receipt issued by Shri Vinod Garg, the Royality Contractor to be false. In the slip dated 11.03.2007, issued by Padmavati Transport Company , there is a mention about 41,940 quintals of marble stone loaded in the said vehicle. The GR no. 10 dated 11.03.2007 has been filed as annexure R 10 stating that the weight was 14,900 kilogram. The investigation into the said accident was conducted. It was concluded after investigation that weighing receipt issued by Shri Vinod Garg, the Royalty Contractor, measuring 14,900 kilogram and the GR no. 10 at Annexure R 10 weighting 14,000 kilogram were found to have been forged. During the time of the accident, there was 41,900 kilogr