AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
HEARD the learned Counsel for the parties.
BY the judgment and order dated 20.7.2000, the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rajasthan allowed the appeal filed by the Insurance Company and dismissed the claim made by the complainant. The State Commission set aside the order dated 15.10.1999 passed by the District Forum, Sawai Madhopur in Complaint No. 55/1999 directing the Insurance Company to pay a sum of Rs. 2,60,567 with interest @ 12% per annum along with litigation costs of Rs. 500. The State Commission observed that it would be open to the complainant to approach the competent Civil Court to get her grievances redressed with regard to subsistence of earlier policy as it depends upon question of fact and law.
Against that order, complainant has preferred this revision application.
IN our view, the impugned order passed by the State Commission cannot be said to be in any way erroneous. Admittedly, in the present case the policy was taken for a LPG Tanker for a sum of Rs. 5,50,000 for a period between 7.11.1997 to 6.11.1998. The tanker met with an accident on 23.11.1997 and, therefore, for the loss suffered by the complainant, claim was settled and INsurance Company paid Rs. 99,594 on 26.2.1998 as ''cash loss basis''. that is to say, the dispute was settled on cash loss basis by paying a sum of Rs. 99,594. It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the Insurance Company that as per the Procedural Manual for the Insurance Company, when the dispute is settled on cash loss basis, the policy is required to be cancelled with immediate effect from the date of the loss without giving any refund of the premium and RTO is also required to be informed by registered post about cancellation of the policy. In this case, this has been done by the Insurance Company.
IT is also pointed out that as per the said procedure, as the matter was settled on cash loss basis, immediately on 27.2.1998 Insurance Company informed the complainant that insurance policy stood cancelled. The said letter was sent to the insured by registered A.D. as well as under UPC. Copy of the said certificate is produced on record. Not only this, immediately on the same date 27.2.1998 by Registered A.D. Insurance Company informed the District Transport Officer, Distt. Sawai Madhopur that as the matter was settled on cash loss basis, policy mentioned thereon stood cancelled with immediate effect from 23.11.1997. Thereafter, on 24.7.1998 the said tanker met with an accident and the complainant filed claim before the Insurance Company. That claim was repudiated by the Insurance Company on the ground that the policy stood cancelled on 23.11.1997. In our view, it was rightly done so, as per procedural manual prescribed for the Insurance Company. The policy stood cancelled from the date when the claim was settled on cash loss basis and for that complainant was informed by Registered A.D. as well as letters sent by UPC, to the same effect, RTO was informed. If the complainant was aggrieved by the cancellation of the policy, he ought to have challenged it at the relevant time. But he cannot claim reimbursement for the loss suffered due to alleged subsequentl accident. Hence, there is no substance in this revision petition and is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Revision Petition dismissed.