ARUN KUMAR GOEL,J. - (1.)Deceased respondent Shri Gopal Singh Chauhan filed complaint against the appellant alleging therein that. since there as deficiency in service due to non settlement of his legitimate claim, therefore, direction may be issued to it (the appellant) to do the needful by1 compensating him. Respondents are legal heirs of late Shri Gopal Singh (hereinafter to be referred to as the respondent) who was complainant before the Forum below and died during the pendency of this appeal. Forum below vide impugned order dated 18.8.2003 in Complaint No. 808 of 2001, while allowing the complaint has issued directions to the appellant to indemnify the respondent in the sum of Rs.2,50,000/ - with interest @ 12% per annum with effect from the date of filing of complaint i.e. 17.2.2003 till actual payment is made. Litigation cost was quantified at Rs.2,500/ - and the entire awarded amount was ordered to be paid to the respondents within 45 days of the receipt of the copy of the impugned order.
(2.)Admitted facts of this case are that the respondent had got insured all kinds of shoes, sleepers and similar types of other related items kept in the shop at Nogli, built of Class A construction. In addition to this, respondent had also got his house insured with the appellant in the sum of Rs.2,00,000/ -. On 31.7.2000 at night river Sutluj was in high spate. This resulted in washing away of number of buildings at Village Nogli where the shop as well as the residence of the respondent was situated. As a result of river getting into spate, number of building were washed away besides causing damage to the merchandise of the shopkeepers like respondent A double storeyed house together with the land whereon it stood having been completely washed away in the flood is certified by the Pradhan, Gram Panchayat, Bhadawali within whose jurisdiction it was situated. So far stock in trade lying in the shop having been damaged due to debris and water is also certified by the Patwari and is countersigned by the Tehsildar Similar Certificate regarding the house and land of the respondent having been washed away because of river getting into spate is also there on record. When his claim was not settled, he filed the complaint wherein above noted relief has been granted to him.
(3.)Dr. Sharma on behalf of the appellant submitted that there is no proof of the house of the respondent having been damaged as a result of river getting into spate, which flooded the area on the night of 31.7.2000. Further, according to him, in the absence of cogent and reliable evidence in this behalf being there on the file, learned Forum below fell into error in passing the impugned order holding his client liable for payment of the amount with interest He also submitted hat compensation to which respondent was entitled is only in the sum of Rs. 6,479/ - as assessed by the Surveyor and Loss Assessor that too in respect of the damage caused to the stock in trade. On the other hand, Mr. Kaprate, learned Counsel for the appellant submitted that when a reference is made to the evidence produced by the parties before the Forum below, no exception can be taken to the impugned award. Thus he prayed for upholding the same while dismissing the present appeal.