H. P. STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION SHIMLA First Appeal No.: 34/2020 Date of Presentation: 24.02.2020 Order Reserved on : 07.11.2022 Date of Order : 15 .11.2022 ___

…

Hem Raj Saini S/o Sh. Tek Chand, Resident of Village Chandyal (Rathoha), Post Office Tikker, Tehsil Sadar (now Balh), District Mandi, H.P.

…… Appellant/Complainant Versus M/s National Insurance Company Ltd. Branch Office Palace Colony, Mandi Town, District Mandi, H.P. Through its Branch Manager.

….Respondent/Opposite party.

Coram Hon’ble Justice Inder Singh Mehta, President Hon’ble Mr.R.K. Verma, Member Whether approved for reporting?, [(cid:1)(cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:5)(cid:6)(cid:5)(cid:3)(cid:7)(cid:8)(cid:5)(cid:4)(cid:3)(cid:5)(cid:9)(cid:6)(cid:8)(cid:10)(cid:6)(cid:4)(cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:6)(cid:11)(cid:8)(cid:12)(cid:13)(cid:11)(cid:6)(cid:7)(cid:13)(cid:7)(cid:3)(cid:5)(cid:9)(cid:6)(cid:14)(cid:13)(cid:15)(cid:6)(cid:16)(cid:3)(cid:6)(cid:13)(cid:11)(cid:11)(cid:8)(cid:17)(cid:3)(cid:18)(cid:6)(cid:4)(cid:8)(cid:6)(cid:9)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:6)(cid:4)(cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:6)(cid:8)(cid:5)(cid:18)(cid:3)(cid:5)?] Yes For the Appellant: Mr.Rocky, Advocate vice Mr.Devender K.Sharma, Advocate.

For the Respondent: Mr. Jagdish Thakur, Advocate Justice Inder Singh Mehta, President

O R D E R

Instant appeal is arising out of the order dated

30.11.2019 passed by Learned District Consumer Forum, Mandi in Consumer Complaint No.54/2019 titled Sh.Hem Raj Brief facts of Case

2. Briefly, the case of the complainant is that complainant is the registered owner of vehicle No.HP-65A- 0487 (tipper/truck). The said vehicle was insured with the opposite party/Insurance company. On 13th April, 2017, the driver Shri Surender Kumar was driving the tipper. When the truck was stopped on left side of the road to give pass to a bus coming from the opposite direction, suddenly retaining wall of (cid:1)

“pucca road collapsed. Resultantly, the vehicle fell into a gorge and was damaged. Information regarding the incident was given to the opposite party/Insurance company and relevant documents were supplied. Rapat No.12, dated 13.04.2017 relating to the accident was entered in Police Post, Sandhol (Mandi). Claim form was signed under an impression that the claim will be settled. The complainant got the vehicle (cid:2)

repaired by spending 3,17,610/-. Repair bills were also provided to the opposite party/Insurance company for payment of claimed amount. The claim was wrongly and illegally rejected vide letter dated 04.12.2017. The opposite party/Insurance company indulged in unfair trade practice and is deficient in rendering the service. Hence, this complaint.

3. The complaint so filed has been contested by the opposite party/Insurance company. It has been pleaded that tipper in question belongs to the complainant and the same was insured with opposite party/Insurance company and the vehicle met with an accident during the period of insurance policy. After receiving intimation regarding the occurrence, Shri Vinod Bhan, Surveyor and Loss Assessor, was deputed to inspect the damaged vehicle and assess the loss. The (cid:2)

Surveyor recommended payment of 1,00,519/- on repair basis subject to the terms and conditions of insurance policy. On receiving report of the Surveyor-cum-Loss Assessor, claim was put up before the competent authority for settlement. While processing the claim and scrutinizing the documents, it was revealed that at the time of accident, the vehicle was carrying 370 cf (cubic feet) concrete against the capacity detailed in the registration certificate and goods carriage permit. The truck was loaded more than 100% of its capacity/permitted limit. Letter dated 04.12.2017 was written to the complainant to explain the position, but in vain. Since no explanation was furnished, the claim was rejected. The complainant is not entitled to any relief.

4. In rejoinder, the complainant has reiterated the contents of complaint and refuted the objections put forth by the opposit