First Appeal No. 22/2013. Case: Universal Sompo General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Dayal Singh and Ors.. Uttaranchal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission

Case NumberFirst Appeal No. 22/2013
CounselFor Appellant: Suresh Gautam, Learned Counsel and For Respondents: S.P. Badhani, Learned Counsel
JudgesB.C. Kandpal, J., D.K. Tyagi, H.J.S. and Veena Sharma, Members
IssueConsumer Protection Act, 1986 - Section 15
Judgement DateJanuary 20, 2015
CourtUttaranchal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission

Order:

D.K. Tyagi, Member

  1. This appeal, under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, has been preferred by the appellant-opposite party No. 1 against the order dated 06.11.2012 passed by the District Forum, Uttarkashi in consumer complaint No. 19 of 2011, whereby the District Forum has allowed the consumer complaint and directed the opposite party No. 1-Universal Sompo General Insurance Co. Ltd. to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs. 3,24,125/- towards damages within one month from the date of order. The facts of the case, as mentioned in the consumer complaint in brief, are that the complainant-Sh. Dayal Singh Mishrawan is the registered owner of a Tipper/Truck, bearing registration No. UK07-CA-0141. This truck was insured with Universal Sompo General Insurance Co. Ltd.-opposite party No. 1 for the period from 16.01.2010 to 15.01.2011. In the evening of 29.05.2010 the said truck, which was being driven by Sh. Ram Bahadur-driver and Sh. Subhash Kumar-conductor, met with an accident due to technical problem in which the driver & conductor of the said truck were sustained injuries. On the same day, the driver and conductor of the said vehicle were admitted in Primary Health Centre, Pratapnagar for medical treatment. Information of the said accident was telephonically given to the opposite party No. 1-insurance company. On 02.06.2010, the insurance company appointed the surveyor, who inspected the said accidental vehicle and submitted his report to the insurance company. According to the complainant, the claim was submitted with the insurance company, but till date no payment was made against the said claim. On 05.08.2010 the insurance company repudiated the complainant's claim on the ground that at the time of accident, the driver of the said truck was not holding a valid license for driving the truck in the hilly areas. The complainant has pleaded that the surveyor appointed by the insurance company was having animosity with the complainant, who has shown the name of driver of the truck as Subhash Kumar instead of Ram Bahadur, who was plying the ill-fated vehicle. Both driver & conductor, Sh Ram Bahadur and Sh. Subhash Kumar, were injured during the accident and were admitted to the Primary Health Centre, Pratapnagar on 29.05.2010 at 9:30 p.m. for medical treatment. The complainant has filed medical slips in this regard on the record. The complainant came to know about the name of driver shown by the surveyor in the survey report when he got survey report from the office of the opposite party No. 1-insurance company. To harm the complainant, the surveyor in collusion with the opposite party No. 1-insurance company got license of conductor Sh. Subhash Kumar instead of driver Sh. Ram Bahadur from the complainant and submitted his survey report in arbitrary manner. The complainant is the "consumer" of the opposite parties, but the opposite party No. 1 has repudiated the claim of the complainant on the basis of false and arbitrary report of surveyor. Therefore, there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party No. 1-insurance company.

  2. The opposite party No. 1-insurance company has filed...

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