A.Mohammed Yasin vs NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD.

THIS is a complaint under Section 17 read with Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.

THE had insured his mini lorry bearing Registration No. TAV 503 with the for the period from 31.7.1991 to 30.7.1992. THE Lorry met with an accident on 16.10.1991 at Katharikuppam at 3.00 AM when the vehicle dashed against the tree in which two persons died on the spot and some persons including the Driver sustained injuries. THE vehicle was damaged extensively and is lying in the automobile workshop since that day. THE police were informed and also the . Survey was conducted by the surveyor appointed by the. But the claim has not been settled inspite of notice. THE has thereby put to heavy loss of not less than Rs. 300/- per day. Hence this claim for the insured value of the vehicle and for compensation. The Opposite Party contented that at the time of the accident, two persons have died on the spot and the eight others who had traveled in the vehicle unauthorisedly were injured. On receipt of the claim the surveyor was appointed and he submitted a report on 11.2.1991. He has assessed the loss at Rs. 75,506.25 on repair basis. Since the Complainant has suppressed vital facts and since the conditions of the policy has been violated, the Divisional Manager recommended settlement of the claim for 75% of the loss. The Complainant has not sent any reply. On account of suppression of real particulars, the Complainant is entitled to my claim.

Exhibits A1 to A7 and B1 to B3 are marked by consent. Proof affidavits are filed.

THE Complainant''s vehicle which has been insured with Opposite Party for he period from 31.7.1991 to 3$7.1992 has met with an accident on 16.10.1991 in which two persons have died and some others have been injured. THE claim preferred with the Opposite Party has not yet been settled. Hence this complaint. The first contention advanced by the Learned Counsel for the Opposite Party is that the lorry had carried unauthorized persons in violation of the condition of the policy and the claim is not therefore maintainable. This contention has no force. The claim is for damages suffered by the lorry in the accident and the question of the lorry carrying passengers unauthorized is not relevant for this case. This contention must therefore fail.

THE surveyor appointed by the insurer has submitted his report and it is marked as Exhibit B-1. THE survey report is exhaustive and the surveyor has estimated the loss at Rs. 75,506.25 under repair-basis. No exception has been taken to this assessment and the Complainant is therefore entitled to this amount. THE offer of the Opposite Party to settle the claim at 75% is clearly untenable. THEre is no reason for treating this claim on non-standard basis and offering to settle it at 75%. It may also be pointed out that the Opposite Party has not given notice of the surveyors report to the Complainant and it is only for the first time before this Commission the report has been filed. We hold therefore that the Complainant is entitled to the amount of Rs. 75,506.25 with interest at 12% per annum from the date of claim till payment. The claim for compensation for loss of business at Rs. 300/- per day made by the Complainant is unsustainable. The Insurance Company cannot be made liable for such consequential loss. In the result, we order that the Opposite Party shall pay to the Complainant Rs. 75,506.25 with interest thereon at 12% from the date of the claim till payment and costs of Rs. 1,000/-. Complaint allowed with costs.