United India Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Jawahar Lal

THIS is an appeal filed by the opposite party against the order dated 24.9.1996 passed by the District Forum, Gwalior in case No. 1069/93 whereby, the District Forum has ordered the opposite parties to pay, jointly and severally, to the complainant Rs. 1,25,000/- as compensation on account of theft and damage caused to the Maruti car of the complainant with interest @ 18% per annum with effect from 29.7.1993 till payment which has been ordered to be made within one month of the order of the District Forum.

IT is not disputed that the complainant purchased a brand new Maruti car and got himself insured in respect of the Maruti car against theft and damage on 27.10.1990 for a sum of Rs.1,25,000/- by paying premium of Rs. 2788/- A week thereafter in the night intervening 3rd and 4th January, 1991, the said Maruti Car was stolen from Khasgi Bazar, Lashkar, Gwalior. An FIR of the theft of the car was lodged by the complainant on 4.1.1991 with the Police Station, Gwalior and a copy of the FIR was sent to the opposite party No. 1 for information. The complainant then filed a claim with the opposite party No. 1 for Rs. 1,25,000/- on account of loss of the car by theft. The police could neither trace culprits nor the car and as such it gave final report accordingly on 7.8.1991 which was supplied to the opposite party on demand by them. Subsequently, the complainant came to learn that the stolen car had been recovered by Police Kotwali, Jhansi and the complainant went to see the stolen car at Kotwali Police Station, Jhansi on 28.1.1992. The complainant found that the car was lying there in completely damaged condition so much so that it would be of no use to the complainant. The complainant informed the opposite party No. 1 about it on 4.2.1992 and again on 15.2.1992. On the direction of the opposite parties, the complainant gave an application to the opposite parties on 30.3.1992 for getting the survey of the car done. The opposite parties on 20.5.1992 issued a written instruction to the complainant to present the car for survey alongwith the details of repairs required. The complainant made an application to the Divisional Manager of the Insurance Company-opposite party No. 1 stating that for getting possession of the car from police custody an application is required to be made to the concerning Court for order in that behalf and that since in connection of the theft of the car the complainant had already submitted with his claim form the document of registration, the key of the car, letter of subrogation and letter of indemnity on the basis of which the opposite party No. 1 could obtain possession from Police Kotwali, Jhansi by moving an application in the concerning Court in that behalf so that the survey and other necessary formalities could be completed expeditiously for finalising the claim of the complainant for payment. But the opposite parties directed the complainant to obtain the vehicle on Supartnama and present the vehicle alongwith the estimate of repairs for final survey of the vehicle.

The complainant obtained possession of the Maruti car in question upon Supartnama by furnishing the necessary security on 14.10.1992 from Kotwali Police Station, Jhansi. The complainant also got the estimate of repairs prepared by Bharat Traders Mass, Jhansi on 14.10.1992, a copy of which is filed as Ex. P17 in the Forum''s record. The total amount of estimate of repairs as Rs. 3,06,153/-.

THE complainant arranged to bring the car from Jhansi to Gwalior for keeping it in Radhika Automobiles Garage for the purpose of final survey in compliance of the direction of the opposite party-Insurance Company. THE complainant also submitted the estimate of repairs for Rs. 3,06,153/- prepared by Bharat Traders Mass, Jhanai. THE Surveyor of the Insurance Company Shri Manohar Singh in due compliance of the direction of the opposite party-Insurance Company, called the complainant and offered him Rs. 52,521 /- against the claim made by the complainant and also pressurised the complainant to accept the amount against his claim. THE complainant declined to accept the order since according to him when he saw the condition of the car at Police Station, Jhansi on 28.1.1992 and found body, chassis and three wheels in completely damaged condition and only some parts of the engine visible and as such the car could not be of any use to the complainant. When the complainant had submitted the estimated repairs amounting to Rs. 3,06,153/- to the opposite party in compliance of their direction, they had raised no objection in that regard. But, while disputing the claim of the complainant the opposite party has alleged the estimate submitted by the complainant to be excessive. The final estimate prepared by the Surveyor-Shri Manohar Singh is not supported by any price list of the parts missing in the damaged car and the repairing charges of Maruti workshop so as to lend credence to the estimate prepared by Shri Manohar Singh because of the wide disparity in estimate given by Bharat Traders Mass to the complainant and the theoretical final estimate prepared by the Surveyor-Shri Manohar Singh. Since the complainant was not in a position to finance repair of the car and the repair cost was going to be too high to restore the damaged car from its wretched condition to its original condition he requested the opposite party-Insurance Company to get the car repaired and make payment to the Garage repairing the car. But the opposite party-Insurance Company has not agreed to that proposition which, in our opinion, would have been a fair proposition to be acted upon. The Maruti Workshop would have been the proper agency to ascertain the cost of repairs for which they could have contracted to make repairs of the car in question to bring it to its original condition.

HAVING heard learned Counsel for the parties and having considered the conduct of the opposite party-Insurance Company in delaying and deferring a proper settlement causing thereby inconvenience and mental tension to the complainant for all these years since 1990 and the fact that it was a brand new car when stolen and now found in a badly damaged wretched condition, we think the compensation of Rs. 1,25,000 /- with interest @ 18% per annum awarded by the District Forum to the complainant from 29.7.1993, the date of filing of the complaint appears to be just and proper. We, therefore, affirm the order with the modification that upon payment made by the opposite party within a month from the date of receipt of this order, the complainant shall deliver the salvage of the damaged car in question. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed with costs. The appellant shall pay cost of Rs. 500/to the complainant as Counsel fee. Appeal dismissed with costs. _____________