Back
UTTAR PRADESH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
Mr. Justice Akhtar Husain Khan President. )
NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. - Appellant
Versus
M/S. PAWAN AUTO STORE - Respondent
First Appeal No. 1260 of 2015 in Complaint Case No. 276 of 2008
Decided on : 14-09-2017
Sri. Zafar Aziz, Advocate, for the Appellant; Sri. Anant Vijay, Advocate, for the Respondent
The main legal point established in the judgment is the principle of estoppel, which prevented the complainant from making further claim after voluntarily receiving the amount in full satisfaction and discharge of the claim.
Headnote:
Consumer Protection Act - Insurance Claim - Section 15 - Summary of Acts and Sections: Consumer Protection Act 1986, Section 15 - The court discussed the issue of whether the respondent had received the amount as full and final settlement and the effect of such acceptance. The court also considered the principle of estoppel and referred to a judgment of the Honourable National Commission in a similar case. The court ultimately set aside the judgment of the District Consumer Forum and dismissed the complaint.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant, an insurance company, appealed against the judgment and order of the District Consumer Forum, which had ordered the appellant to pay a certain amount to the complainant as compensation for a fire incident. The main issue was whether the complainant had received the amount as full and final settlement.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the complainant had voluntarily received the amount in full satisfaction and discharge of the claim, and therefore, was stopped by the principle of estoppel to make further claim. The court referred to a judgment of the Honourable National Commission in a similar case and set aside the judgment of the District Consumer Forum, dismissing the complaint.
Issues: The main issue was whether the complainant had received the amount as full and final settlement and the effect of such acceptance.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the complainant had voluntarily received the amount in full satisfaction and discharge of the claim, and therefore, was stopped by the principle of estoppel to make further claim.
Final Decision: The court set aside the judgment of the District Consumer Forum and dismissed the complaint, allowing the appeal with costs.
ORDER
Akhtar Husain Khan, President. - This is an appeal filed under Section-15 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 against judgment and order dated 16-02-2015 passed by the District Consumer Forum, Allahabad in Complaint Case No. 276 of 2008 M/s. Pawan Auto Store v. The New India Assurance Company Limited and another whereby the District Consumer Forum has ordered opposite parties to pay Rs. 4,64,333/- to complainant with interest calculated at the rate of 9 percent per annum from the date of complaint till date of payment. The District Consumer Forum has further ordered opposite parties to pay to complainant Rs. 1,000/- as compensation and Rs. 500/- as cost of litigation.
2. Feeling aggrieved with the judgment and order, opposite party of the complaint The New India Assurance Company Limited has filed this appeal.
Learned Counsel Mr. Zafar Aziz appeared for appellant.
Learned Counsel Mr. Anant Vijay appeared for respondent.
3. I have heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused impugned judgment and order as well as records.
4. Insurance policy of respondent/complainant as well as incident of fire alleged by respondent/complainant are admitted to appellant Insurance Company. It is also admitted to both parties that the total sum assured by the policy was Rs. 10,00,000/-. It is also admitted to both parties that the appellant Insurance Company has paid Rs. 4,35,667/- only to the respondent/complainant to indemnify loss suffered in the incident.
5. It has been contended by respondent/complainant that he has not accepted above amount as full and final settlement. He has accepted above amount as an interim payment. He is entitled to remaining amount of loss assessed by surveyor which is Rs. 10,13,218/-.
6. Per contra it has been contended by appellant Insurance Company that the respondent/complainant has accepted above amount as full and final settlement and has signed discharge voucher accordingly.
7. It has been further contended by appellant Insurance Company that the surveyor has recommended settlement of claim on Rs. 4,65,667/- and claim has been settled accordingly which has been accepted by respondent/complainant. As such complaint filed by respondent/complainant is not maintainable.
8. I have considered the submissions made on behalf of parties.
9. The District Consumer Forum has not decided the issue as to whether respondent/complainant has received Rs. 4,35,667/- as full and final payment If yes what is its effect The District Consumer Forum has accepted claim of complainant now respondent merely on the ground that it has been established that the shop of respondent/complainant was having stock of Rs. 9,00,000/- and surveyor has also assessed loss to the tune of Rs. 10,13,000/-. The District Consumer Forum has held that deduction of 55% made by opposite party from Rs. 10,13,000/- the loss assessed by surveyor is not justified.
Indisputably the surveyor has assessed loss to the tune of Rs. 10,13,228/- and has recommended payment of Rs. 4,35,958/- to insured complainant after having made deduction of 55% along-with further Rs. 10,000/- value of salvage from above assessed loss of Rs. 10,13,228/-.
10. The surveyor has given reason in his report for deduction of 55% from the loss assessed. Relevant par of surveyor's report is extracted below:-
11. Loss Assessment : So as per available records total value of stock is 10,13,218.00 which is very high keeping in view nature of business of Insured, location and size of shop. It seems that insured's available records is reflecting higher stocks than what is actually possessed by the Insured. Our this finding is also based on following facts:
1. Insured Annual sales is around 5 lacs as against stocks of Rs. 10 lacs, which means that insured keeps stocks almost equivalent to two years sales. No businessman of ordinary prudence would keep so huge inventory of stocks. Normally in I
