Acceptance of a settlement in insurance claims, evidenced by encashment of a cheque, precludes further claims unless coercion is established.

6. Being aggrieved from the order passed by the District Forum, the insurer approached the concerned State Commission by way of an appeal. Vide impugned order dated 12.01.2015 the State Commission allowed the appeal and modified the order of the District Forum by directing the insurer to pay a sum of Rs. 3,20,740/- to the complainant after deducting payment already made to him along-with interest @ 9% w.e.f. 18.12.2008 and Rs. 15,000/- as compensation.

7. Being still aggrieved the complainant is before this Commission. The insurer, however, has not challenged the order passed by the State Commission.

8. From the letter dated 31.08.20098 written by the complainant to the insurer it is evident that the complainant agreed to accept an amount of Rs. 2,15,775/- in complete settlement of his claim. Accordingly, the insurer paid the said amount to him vide cheque dated 18.12.2008 which the complainant had duly encashed. Though, the case of the complainant is that the aforesaid cheque of Rs. 2,15,775/- was accepted by him under protest, in the facts and circumstances of the case as discussed hereinbelow do not support the plea taken by him. Though even as per complainant’s own letter the cheque dated 18.12.2008 was received by him on 26.12.2008, the letter which he delivered to the insurer was delivered to the officer of the insurer on 05.01.2009 though the date put on the letter was 26.12.2008. The complainant’s office is in Chandausi, which is part of District Moradabad where the letter to the insurer was delivered. Had this letter been actually written on 26.12.2008 it would have been delivered in the office of the insurer latest by 27.12.2008. The fact that the letter was delivered by hand on 05.01.2009 is a clear indicator that the letter had been pre-dated and was sent only after encashing the cheque of Rs. 2,15,775/-, the complainant being apprehensive that the insurer might stop the payment of the cheque if the letter was received by it before the encashment of the cheque.

9. Another important aspect of the matter is that even the letter sent by the complainant to the insurer gives no reason as to why the complainant accepted Rs. 2,15,775/- when the much much higher.

10. In the absence of any reason being given in the above-referred letter dated 26.12.2008 for accepting a much lesser amount, there is no escape from the conclusion that the complainant had voluntarily accepted the amount offered by the insurer and that is why he had executed the consent letter dated 31.08.2008 months before receiving the cheque of Rs. 2,15,775/-.

11. In my opinion, having accepted the cheque of Rs. 2,15,775/- voluntarily and without any protest from the insurer the complainant was estopped from claiming any additional amount from the insurer. The consent letter executed by him on 31.08.2008 constituted a valid and legally binding agreement between the parties, the fixed amount was paid and accepted as a settlement between the parties.

12. The issue involved in this petition came up for consideration of this Commission in RP No. 2771/2017 M/s Pankaj Trading Co. & Ors. Vs. National Insurance Co. Ltd. order dated 19.02.2020 and the following view was taken:-

“8. The issue involved in this case came up for consideration of this Commission recently inCC No.285 of 2013 M/s Elastrex Polymers Pvt. Ld. Vs. M/s New India Assurance Co. Ltd.,decided on 16.08.2019 and the following view was taken:

(13) The learned counsel for the complainant refers to the Circulars dated 24.09.2015 and 07.06.2016 issued by IRDA which to the extent they are relevant reads as under :

Circular dated 24.09.2015

“The Insurance Companies are using ‘discharge voucher’ or