AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Respondent no. 1 & 2 filed a consumer complaint against the petitioner opposite party and Punjab National Bank alleging deficiency in service on the part of the petitioner opposite party in relation to the insurance cover purchased by the complainants to cover the payment of goods exported by the complainants to the foreign buyers.
The complaint was allowed by the District Forum vide order dated 12.10.2006. Operative portion of the order is reproduced as under: We accept the present complaint and direct the Ops to pay the 90% of value of 11875.75 Euro ( goods exported by the petitioner vide lading No. PONLDEL 27008966 dated 24.4.2002) together with interest at rate of 12 % per annum ( because three months time was sufficient for the OPs to settle the claim) till the realization together with Rs.3300/- as litigation expenses within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
The opposite parties being aggrieved of the order of the District Forum preferred separate appeals. The appeals were dismissed by the State Commission vide order dated 28.08.2012. The revision petition preferred by the present petitioner was also dismissed by the National Commission.
The respondents complainants filed Execution Petition being Petition No. EA 34 of 2013 before the District Forum Panipat. During the pendency of execution petition, the petitioner opposite party paid a sum of Rs.11,23,906 to the complainant decree holders calculated on the basis of conversion rate of 11,875.75 Euros as on 24.04.2002 and the interest calculated thereon. The complainants decree holders while accepting said payment disputed, that the payment satisfied the decree, mainly on the plea that value of the Euros payable should have been calculated on the conversion rate applicable on the date of payment.
The District Forum after hearing the parties dismissed the objection of the petitioner with following observations: "After hearing counsel of both the parties and after perusal of the order of this Forum it is very clear that this Forum has passed an order to pay 90% of value of 11,875.75 Euro. As such, the OP was to pay the amount in Indian currency whichever was the value of Euro. Specifically, when court is passing an order for payment of amount as value of Euro the OP is bound to pay the value of Euro when he is making the payment. Order of this forum was passed in 2006 but till 2013 ECGC has not paid the amount to the complainant in compliance of the order. Now at this stage it is well settled law that executing court cannot go behind the decree under execution. In view of the order of this Forum, the ECGC has to pay the value of Euro when is paying the amount. Amount is to be paid in value of Euro whichever value exists at the time of payment, in compliance with the order of this Forum. In view of above discussion, certainly ECGC has not paid the complete amount as per order passed by this Forum. Hence ECGC is further directed to pay the amount."
The petitioners being aggrieved of the aforesaid order of the Executing Court approached the State Commission Haryana in RP No. 66 of 2014. The State Commission Haryana did find merit in the revision petition and dismissed the same. Being aggrieved, the petitioner has approached this Commission in revision.
Learned Shri Bharat Sangal, Advocate for the petitioner has contended that impugned orders of the Fora below in Execution proceedings are not sustainable as the orders are passed in utter disregard of the terms and conditions of the insurance contract. Expanding on the argument, learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn our attention to clause 17 of the terms and conditions which deals with the issue of Rate of Exchange and submitted that as per the aforesaid clause, all the payments under the policy are to be made in Indian rupee by converting the invoiced amount of foreign currency payable at the rate of exchange at Mumbai on the date of relative shipment. It is argued that impugned order of the Fora below being against the expressed stipulation of the insurance contract obviously suffers from material infirmity and are liable to be set aside.
Learned counsel for respondent nos. 1 & 2 on the contrary has argued in support of the impugned order. It is argued that both the Fora below have rightly held that complainant is supposed to pay the stipulated amount as per the Euro conversion rate applicable on the date of payment.
We have considered the rival contentions. The short question involved in the revision petition is whether under the insurance contract, the amount payable to the respondent complainants is to be paid as per the conversion rate applicable on the basis of invoiced value of the shipment or as per the conversion rate applicable on the date of actual payment of the claim pursuant to the order of the consumer forum?
In order to find answer to the aforesaid question, it would be useful to have a look on clause 17 of the terms and conditions of the insurance contract which reads as under: "17. Rate of Exchange : All payments under this Policy shall be in Indian Rupee at the Head Office or the Corporation and, for the purpose of payment of premiums and losses, the gross invoice value of shipments invoiced in a foreign currency shall be converted into India Rupee at the Bank buying rate of exchange at Mumbai on the date of the relative shipment PROVIDED THAT in devaluation of the currency in which the buyer has to pay takes place before the claim is paid, the amount claimed in Indian currency shall be based on the devalued rate."
On bare reading of the above, it is clear that as per the insurance contract, the opposite party insurer was required to pay the insurance claim as per the conversion rate of the invoiced foreign currency in Indian rupee as per the bank buying rate of interest at Mumbai on the date of subject shipment for which the invoice was issued. Undisputedly, sum of Rs.11,23,906 paid by the Judgment Debtor was calculated on the basis of conversion rate applicable at the time of shipment of invoiced value and the interest awarded by the consumer forum. Therefore, it cannot be said that any further amount is due from the opposite party under the decree. Both the Fora below have passed the impugned order in utter disregard of the expressed term No.17 of the insurance contract. The orders thus suffer from material irregularity and cannot be sustained.
In view of the discussion above, we allow the revision petition, set aside the order of the Fora below and record that Execution Petition No. 34 of 2013 stands fully satisfied.