AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
COMPLAINANT /Petitioner got his Toyota Qualis vehicle bearing registration No. CG 06A 7113 insured with the Respondent Insurance Company for Rs.4,50,000/- for the period from 18.06.04 to 17.06.05. Insured vehicle met with an accident on 22.05.05 at Village Thana Mauda, Near Nagpur (Maharasthra). The vehicle was badly damaged. Four persons died in the accident including Petitioner ''s son, Manoj Kumar Singh. Petitioner lodged the FIR and simultaneously informed the Respondent Insurance Company about the accident. On being intimated, Respondent appointed surveyor, M/s. Prakash & Co. who assessed 100% loss of the vehicle. On the basis of report of Surveyor, Insurance Company invited tender and sold the vehicle for Rs.1,40,000/- on salvage loss basis and paid the same to the Petitioner. Since the vehicle was insured for Rs.4,50,000/-, Petitioner submitted the claim for the balance amount of Rs.3,10,000/- besides certain other expenses totaling Rs.3,43,483/- . As the claim of the Petitioner was rejected by the Respondent, he filed the complaint before the District Forum claiming a sum of Rs.3,43,483/-.
RESPONDENT , on being served, put in appearance and resisted the complaint on the ground that the vehicle was registered for private use and in violation of the terms of the policy was being used as a taxi at the time of accident. Since the vehicle was being used in violation of terms of the policy, Petitioner was not entitled to the benefits under the policy. District Forum on the basis of pleadings and the evidence produced by the parties, came to the conclusion that the vehicle was being used as a taxi in breach of the terms of the policy and, therefore, the petitioner was not entitled to any relief. Complaint was dismissed.
PETITIONER , being aggrieved, filed the appeal before the State Commission. State Commission held that the Respondent had failed to prove that the vehicle was being used as a taxi in breach of the terms of the policy. Appeal was allowed and order of the District Forum was set aside. State Commission concluded that the Surveyor had assessed the loss at Rs.2,24,000/-. Since the sum of Rs.1,40,000/- had already been paid as salvage value to the Petitioner, Respondent was directed to pay the balance amount of Rs.84,000/- to the Petitioner along with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing of complaint till realization. Rs.2,000/- were awarded by way of costs. Respondent has accepted the order of the State Commission and has not filed any Revision Petition. However, the Petitioner has filed the present Revision Petition seeking enhancement of the compensation.
COUNSEL for the Petitioner contends that the insured declared value of the vehicle was Rs.4,50,000/-. Agreed negotiated value of the vehicle on salvage basis was fixed at Rs.3,65,000/-. After taking into account that the sum of Rs.1,40,000/- had already been paid to the Petitioner, the Surveyor assessed the payable loss on salvage basis at Rs.2,24,000/-. That the State Commission has wrongly taken the loss on salvage basis to be Rs.2,24,000/-. That the loss should be assessed at the agreed negotiated value of Rs.3,65,000/-. We find substance in this submission. The Surveyor assessed the loss on salvage loss basis as under:- [VERNACULAR TEXT OMMITED]
It is evident from the perusal of the Surveyor ''s report that the agreed negotiated value was fixed at Rs.3,65,000/-. Since Rs.1,40,000/- had already been paid to the Respondent after deducting Rs.1,000/- towards the policy excess, the loss was assessed at Rs.2,24,000/-. As the agreed negotiated value of the vehicle was Rs.3,65,000/-, the Insurance Company was liable to pay Rs.2,24,000/-. Sum of Rs.1,40,000/- had already been paid to the Petitioner out of the agreed negotiated value of Rs.3,65,000/-.
FOR the reasons stated above, Revision Petition is allowed, order of the State Commission is modified and the Respondent is directed to pay the sum of Rs.2,24,000/- to the Petitioner along with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing of complaint fill realization within a period of eight weeks after adjusting the sum, if any, paid to the Petitioner in pursuance of the order of State Commission.