First Appeal No. A/107/2007, (Arisen out of Order Dated null in Case No. of District None). Case: Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Vs Mahendra Yadav.

Case NumberFirst Appeal No. A/107/2007, (Arisen out of Order Dated null in Case No. of District None)
JudgesMr. Subhash Chandra Jha President and Mrs. Renu Sinha Member
IssueConsumer Law
Judgement DateMay 19, 2011


S.C. Jha, President

  1. This appeal has been directed against the order dated 21-12-2006 passed in Consumer Complaint No. 43/2006 by the learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Gaya (hereinafter to be referred to as District Forum) whereby and whereunder the learned District Forum has held that the respondents, who were O.Ps. there were entitled to get their insured amount after deducting 15% depreciation from the insured amount besides they were also entitled to get a sum of Rs. 5000/- for harassment and mental agony and thereby directed the appellant-Oriental Insurance Company to pay the same within two months from the date of passing of the order.

  2. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the aforesaid order, the Insurance Company concerned has filed this appeal praying therein to set-aside the order as stated above.

  3. The brief fact of the case, which led to filing of the complaint in the District Forum is that a tractor bearing registration No. BR-2B-2811 along with trolley bearing registration No. BR-2B-2812 were insured with the Oriental Insurance Company, which was stolen away by one Rakesh Kumar on 05-06-2004. Earlier Rakesh Kumar had taken the said tractor on the pretext of carrying bricks from the Brick Kiln but he did not return rather decamped with the tractor and sold somewhere. The complainant lodged Sanha with the Police on 20-07-2004 and accordingly F.I.R. was drawn bearing Rampur P.s. Case No. 80/2004 under Section 379 I.P.C. The case was investigated by the Police and the Police found the case true. The complainant lodged petition for compensation from the Insurance Company, which was repudiated by the appellant on the ground that it was not a case of theft rather it was a case of misappropriation after entrustment of the vehicle concerned.

  4. The complaint was lodged for claim of Rs. 1,67,000/- with 16% interest. The main contention, which was raised before us on behalf of the appellant was that the learned District Forum failed to appreciate that it was not a case of theft rather it was a case of entrustment. So ingredients of...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT