ORDER

This petition has been filed under Section 21(b) of The Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (corresponding Section 58(1)(b) of the Act 2019) in challenge to the Order dated 12.07.2021 of The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Delhi in appeal no. 505 of 2018 arising out of the Order dated 23.10.2018 of The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-X, Delhi in complaint no. 667 of 2007.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the insurance co. (the petitioner herein). Perused the material on record, including the District Commission’s Order dated 23.10.2018, the State Commission’s impugned Order dated 12.07.2021 and the petition.

3. The matter relates to a claim made by the complainant (the respondent no. 1 herein) with the insurance co., on the insured vehicle meeting with an accident.

The accident occurred in 2006, we are now in 2021, the matter is still not settled.

4. The District Commission vide its Order dated 23.10.2018 ordered the insurance co. to pay the insured declared value of the vehicle i.e. Rs.8,50,000/- with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from 01.05.2006. It also ordered that first charge on the awarded amount shall be of the bank (the respondent no. 2 herein) which had financed the subject vehicle and with which the vehicle was hypothecated; as such the insurance co. shall ensure from the bank whether the loan had been settled, and, if not, the outstanding loan shall be first cleared and the balance awarded amount paid to the complainant. A sum of Rs. 20,000/- was awarded as compensation, and of Rs. 10,000/- as cost of litigation.

In appeal the State Commission vide its Order dated 12.07.2021 concurred with the finding of the District Commission. It upheld the award made by the District Commission with one modification, that the cost of litigation shall be Rs. 25,000/- instead of Rs. 10,000/-. It further ordered that the award shall be complied with on or before 30.09.2021, failing which the insurance co. shall be liable to pay interest at the rate of 12% per annum instead of the 9% per annum ordered by the District Commission. It also directed that the amount of the FDR deposited in compliance of its interim Order dated 20.12.2018 alongwith interest accrued thereon be released in favour of the complainant, to be adjusted towards partial satisfaction of the award.

5. Learned counsel for the insurance co. submits, on instructions, that the insurance co. wishes to comply with the award as firmed-up by the State Commission.

He further submits that the insurance co. is facing problem from the bank in ascertaining the outstanding amount on the loan, and requests that a direction be made by this Commission that the award may be satisfied through the District Commission, the outstanding dues of the bank may be first settled and the balance paid to the complainant, and the amount of the FDR deposited in compliance of the State Commission’s interim Order dated 20.12.2018 alongwith interest accrued thereon may be concurrently adjusted.

In the facts and circumstances of the case, this appears to be a fair submission.

6. The insurance co. shall satisfy the award, as firmed-up by the State Commission, through the District Commission. The District Commission shall first settle the outstanding dues of the bank if any and shall pay the balance if any to the complainant, concomitantly adjusting the amount of the FDR deposited in compliance of the State Commission’s interim Order dated 20.12.2018 alongwith interest accrued thereon.

7. Since there is no change re the findings of the lower fora or re the award firmed-up by the State Commission, and only a direction is being made to ensure compliance of the award in a feasible and methodical manner, there appears no need to trouble the complainant or the bank.

8. The petition is disposed of with the direction contained in para 6 above.

9. The Registry is requested to send a copy each of this Order to all parties in the petition, i.e. the insurance co., the complainan