LEGAL APPROACH
Ensuring Legal Services

 
  About Us >>  
  Areas of Practice >>  
  Judgments >>  
  Bare Acts >>  
  Court Websites >>  
  Cause Lists >>  
  Formats >>  
  Contact us >>  
  Blog >>  
  Disclaimer >>  
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Shyam Lal dated 2014-09-08

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

NEW DELHI

 

REVISION  PETITION NO.   4527  OF  2013  

(Against the order dated 19.9.2013  in  F.Appeal No.  FA/740/08 

of State Commission, Delhi)

 

United India Insurance Co. Ltd.

Through its duly Constituted Attorney, Manager

Regd. Office at:

Delhi Regional Office-I

8th Floor, Kanchenjunga Building

18, Barakhamba Road

New Delhi-110001.                                                     …  Petitioner

 

Versus

 

Shyam Lal

Sole Proprietor of

M/s. Banwari Lal

Shyam Lal, 3989,

Naya Bazar

Delhi-110 006.                                                                 … Respondent

 

BEFORE :

          HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. CHAUDHARI,

 PRESIDING MEMBER

 

 

For the Petitioner                   :         Shri Abhishek Kumar, Adv. and

                                                          Shri Yogesh Mehta, Adv.

 

For the Respondent              :         Shri Aditya N. Mahajan, Adv.

 

Pronounced on   8th  September, 2014


 

ORDER

 

PER JUSTICE K.S. CHAUDHARI, PRESIDING MEMBER

                   This Revision Petition has been filed by the Petitioner against the order dated 19.9.2013 passed by State Commission in First Appeal No. 740 of 2008, by which while allowing appeal partly, order of the District Forum allowing complaint was modified.

Brief facts of the case are that Complainant-Respondent-Sole Proprietor got his stock insured from Opposite Party-Petitioner for Rs. 60.00 lakhs for a period of one year from 10.3.2003 to 9.3.2004.  In the intervening night of 1-2 May, 2003, fire took place in the insured’s premises and loss of Rs. 9.00 lakhs was caused.  Complainant submitted claim to Opposite Party and fully cooperated with Opposite Party and the surveyor and supplied all the documents but his claim was not settled .  Alleging deficiency on the part of Opposite Party, Complaint filed complaint before the District Forum.  Opposite Party resisted complaint and submitted that surveyor assessed loss of Rs. 54,545/- and denied other allegations and prayed for dismissal of complaint.  Learned District Forum after hearing both the parties, allowed the complaint and directed Opposite Party to pay Rs. 6,52,480/- as loss and further allowed Rs. 1.00 lakh towards compensation for mental agony and Rs. 20,000/- towards cost of litigation.  Appeal filed by the Opposite Party was partly allowed by Learned State Commission vide impugned order and compensation ofRs. 6,52,480/- was reduced to Rs. 54,545/- and rest of the order was upheld against which this Revision Petition has been filed.

Heard Learned Counsel for the parties and perused record.

Learned Counsel for the Petitioner  submitted that Learned State Commission while modifying compensation committed error in upholding compensation of Rs. 1.00 lakh for mental agony etc. and Rs. 20,000/- as cost of litigation, hence, Revision Petition be allowed and impugned order be modified to this extent. 

Learned Counsel for Respondent submitted that order passed by Learned State Commission is in accordance with Law, hence, Revision Petition be dismissed.

Learned Counsel for Respondent has drawn my attention towards written statement filed by him in which it was mentioned that surveyor repeatedly asked Complainant to submit necessary documents but he did not submit documents and ultimately after 7 months,  claim file was closed on 2.3.2005.  Thereafter, Complainant sent two letters on 27.5.2005 and 6.6.2005 and requested for re-opening the claim file.  In Memo of Appeal, Petitioner mentioned that surveyor’s report got delayed due to non-cooperation of Respondent.  In the light of the aforesaid document, it becomes clear that claim could not be settled as Respondent failed to submit documents in time.

District Forum allowed claim of Rs. 6,52,480/- and State Commission modified it to Rs. 54,545/- as per assessment by the surveyor and Respondent has not challenged order of the State Commission meaning thereby he accepted loss as assessed by the surveyor.  When quantum of compensation has been reduced from Rs. 6,52,480/-  to Rs. 54,545/-, there was no justification for upholding grant of compensation of Rs. 1.00 lakh for mental agony, harassment etc. and further  upholding Rs. 20,000/- as cost of litigation and in such circumstances, compensation for mental agony etc. is to be set aside and litigation cost is also to be reduced.

Consequently, Revision Petition filed by the Petitioner is allowed and impugned order dated 19.2.2013 passed by Learned State Commission in FA No. 740 of 2008- United Insurance Co. Ltd.  VS. Shyam Lal,ispartly modified and order upholding compensation of Rs. 1.00 lakh towards mental agony etc. is set aside and Rs. 20,000/- as cost of litigation is reduced to Rs. 5,000/- and rest of the order is upheld.

 

 

.…………………………….

( K.S. CHAUDHARI, J. )

PRESIDING MEMBER

Mk/court4/

 


© 2008-2014 Legal Approach