Decided on January 04,2010

Ganga Thakur Appellant


- (1.) APPELLANTS are aggrieved from the order passed by District Forum Shimla, Camp at Solan, HP, dated 14.12.2007, whereby Complaint No. 54/2004 filed by their late predecessor Sh. Inder Singh has been dismissed. Admitted position giving rise to this appeal is, that vehicle bearing registration No. HP -14 -6896 was duly insured under a valid policy of insurance with the respondent, between 9.12.2002 to 8.12.2003, for a sum of Rs. 1.60 lacs.
(2.) NOW the dispute starts. As according to the respondent vide Annexure OP -1 dated 12.12.2002 deceased approached the Solan Branch of the respondent to cancel the policy in question. In this context it may be appropriate to notice that cover note Annexure B was issued on 9.12.2002 after the vehicle had been inspected at Nauni at 7:30 PM. Total payment of Rs. 4245/ - was made as per this cover note in cash. Cover note having been issued by the respondent -insurance company by its authorized agent after receipt of cash premium, is not in dispute. Further according to the respondent after the receipt of Annexure R -1, sum of Rs. 3258/ - was sent vide cheque Annexure OP -II, dated 27.12.2002. This cheque was forwarded alongwith letter Annexure OP -III, dated 31.12.2002 to the deceased. There is no material whatsoever produced on record to show as to when Annexure OP -III, and by what mode it was sent alongwith the cheque as alleged by the respondent. Likewise, there is nothing on record again placed by the respondent as to when this letter was refused by the deceased. According to us this would have gone a long way to enable us to come to a correct conclusion in this appeal in the face of defence of the respondent while contesting the complaint.
(3.) FURTHER case of the respondent is that the premium was short, as such on this ground also sum of Rs. 3258/ - was returned to the deceased. As already observed premium was paid in cash. It is not the case of the respondent that the sum received by its authorized agent vide Annexure B filed with the complaint was either deficient or in any manner less than the due premium payable. In these circumstance we are of the view that the insurance premium paid vide Annexure B was deficient is being noted to be rejected. In case it was so, how and in what manner the deficiency was worked out. Not only this when cash receipt of Rs. 4245/ - is admitted by the respondent vide cover note, then how Rs. 3258/ - was worked out and sent as claimed by the respondent in its defence, again there is no material on record placed by it. Now comes the question as to whether the policy had been got cancelled by the deceased Shri Inder Singh Thakur, vide Annexure OP -II on 12.12.2002. If we accept this stand urged on behalf of the respondent, this appeal has to be dismissed.;

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.