H. P. STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION SHIMLA First Appeal No. : 310/2019 Date of Presentation :19.09.2019 Order Reserved on :18.03.2024 Date of Order :28.03.2024 _____

Sunil Kumar son of Sh. Mangat Ram, R/o Village & Post Office Bhambla, Tehsil Baldwara, District Mandi, H.P.

…… Appellant/Opposite Party.

Versus Divisional Manager, National Insurance Company Ltd., Moti Bazar, Mandi Town, H.P.

…Respondent/complainant.

Coram Hon’ble Justice Inder Singh Mehta, President Hon’ble Mr.R.K. Verma, Member Whether approved for reporting?¹ Yes.

For the Appellant: None.

For the Respondent: Mr.Bhupinder Pathania, Advocate.

1Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the order?

Justice Inder Singh Mehta, President

O R D E R

Instant appeal is arising out of the order dated

03.08.2019 passed by Learned District Consumer Forum, Mandi, District Mandi, H.P. in Consumer Complaint No.163/2018 titled Sunil Kumar Versus Divisional Manager, National Insurance Company Ltd.

Brief facts of Case

2. Brief facts of the case are that complainant is the registered owner of vehicle No.HP-65-2787 (heavy goods vehicle/truck) which was insured with the opposite party/Insurance company and risk was covered from 20.05.2017 to 19.05.2018. IDV (Insured Declared Value) of the truck was Rs.6,99,750/-. On 13.12.2017, at place Ladraur, Tehsil Bhoranj, due to bad weather and fog, the truck of the complainant bearing No.HP-65-2787 and jeep bearing No.HP28A-1905 coming from the opposite side skidded on the road and both the vehicles were damaged in this accident. Rapat No.5, dated 13.12.2017 was entered in Police Station, Bhoranj. Intimation regarding the accident was given to the opposite party/insurance company. A Surveyor appointed by the opposite party/insurance company who inspected the truck and assessed the loss to the tune of Rs.92,454/-. The vehicle was taken to Govindgarh (Punjab) for its repair and Rs.1,75,670/- were incurred to get the vehicle repaired. Necessary bills/documents were supplied to the opposite party/insurance company to pay the claimed amount. The claim of the complainant was repudiated by the opposite party/insurance company vide letter dated 23.02.2018 on the ground that the vehicle/truck was overloaded at the time of incident. Bajri (grit) weighing 9 metric ton (M.T.), which was permissible under the law, was loaded in the truck when the accident took place. The opposite party/insurance company indulged in unfair trade practice and was deficient in rendering the service. Hence, the present complaint.

3. The opposite party/insurance company filed reply and did not deny that vehicle in question was insured with the opposite party/insurance company and the said vehicle met with an accident during the period of insurance policy. At the time of occurrence, 350 C.F.T. grit/bajri was loaded in the truck. Average weight of one C.F.T. grit/bajri is 37 kilograms. Total load in the truck was 12950 kilograms. Registered laden weight of truck is 16200 kilograms and un- laden weight is 7400 kilograms. The vehicle was passed to carry load of 8800 kilograms. After receiving intimation regarding the incident, a surveyor was appointed who assessed the loss to the tune of Rs.92,454/- on repair basis subject to the terms and conditions of insurance policy. Since the truck was overloaded and was being plied in violation of the policy conditions, the claim was rightly rejected. There was no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on behalf of the opposite party/insurance company.

A prayer for dismissal of complaint was made

4. A rejoinder denying the contents of the reply and reiterating those of the complaint was filed.

5. Thereafter, the parties adduced evidence in support of their respective pleadings.

6. After hearing learned counsel parties, learned District Commission dismissed the complaint of the complainant.

7. Feeling aggrieved by the order of learned District Commission, the appellant/complainant preferred the instant appeal before this C