Justice Arun Kumar Goel (Retd.), President:- Shri Ratish Sharma, learned Counsel for the appellants urged that the impugned order dated 10.1.2005 in Complaint No. 944/99 passed by the District Forum, Shimla is not sustainable in any situation, whatsoever. As according to him, respondent as well as his cousin Shri Naveen Gupta had consented for total loss of Car No. HP-03-3340 at Rs. 1,45,000/-. Annexure R.4 is a copy of letter purported to have been received from the respondent by the Divisional Manager of the appellant at Mandi and Annexure R.5 is a consent letter purported to have been given by Naveen Gupta on 6.8.1999 to that effect. Annexure R.7 is the discharge voucher. It is in the sum of Rs. 1,44,000/-. This amount was received by the Attorney of the respondent, according to Mr. Sharma, in full and final settlement of all claims present or future regarding vehicle in question accident of which occurred on 11.7.1999. We are taking note of only these facts being relevant for deciding this appeal. Mr. Sharma forcefully urged that after having received a sum of Rs. 1,44,000/- in full and final settlement of the claim in question, complaint was not maintainable before the D