R.S. Sharma, J. (President) - (1.) This appeal is directed against the order dated 13.3.2015, passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Durg (C.G.) (henceforth "District Forum" for short), in Complaint Case No. CC/13/239. By the impugned order, learned District Forum, has dismissed the complaint filed by appellant (complainant). Briefly stated the facts of the complaint are that the appellant (complainant) is working as Liaisoning Manager in the Sponge Iron Factory and he is looking after the Company and is doing other work on behalf of the Company. The appellant (complainant) is also doing business of selling of the Sponge Iron. On being received an order from Nilesh Steel and Alloys Private Limited, Jalna, Maharashtra for supply of sponge iron, the appellant (complainant) after loading the sponge iron in truck bearing registration No. C.G. -07 -E -8368 of Bengal Maharashtra Roadway, Raipur to Nilesh Steel and Alloys Private Limited, Jalna, Maharashtra vide bilty No. 990 and 991 on 14.8.2011. The said goods was taken by the driver of the vehicle carefully. The price of the goods was Rs. 10,47,607. The above sponge iron was insured with the respondent (O.P.) for the period from 16.12.2010 to 15.12.2011. The insurance policy No. is 451203/21/10/04/0000134. The premium of the insurance policy Rs. 44,122 was deposited in the office of the respondent (O.P.) and the entire sponge iron goods was covered under the said insurance policy by the respondent (O.P.). On 16.8.2011, when the above truck reached Bagh Nadi, Near Bullard Paam, it fell down in the River due to technical problem. On account of this, the entire sponge iron kept in above truck was damaged due to sinking and flowing. The appellant (complainant) immediately gave intimation regarding the incident to the respondent (O.P.) as well as owner of the truck. The claim of the appellant (complainant) was investigated by the respondent (complainant) through its Investigator and the Investigator has also submitted all photographs in the office of the respondent (O.P.), but even then the respondent (O.P.) did not settle the claim of the appellant (complainant). Without any legal ground, the respondent (O.P.) is not settling the claim of the appellant (complainant) and as per terms and conditions of the insurance policy, the respondent (O.P.) did not pay amount of Rs. 10,47,607 due to which the appellant (complainant) is suffering financial loss and mental agony. The respondent (O.P.) committed deficiency in service. The intimation regarding the incident was immediately given to Police Station Mauja Pawnar, District Wardha (Maharashtra), where Panchnama of the place of incident was prepared and action was taken and thereafter intimation regarding the incident was immediately given to the appellant (complainant) and the respondent (O.P.) through telephone and through written application. Thereafter the respondent (O.P.) appointed Surveyor, who visited the spot and investigated the matter. The Surveyor also took photographs of the damaged parts and vehicle. The appellant (complainant) submitted the claim form along with all relevant documents in the office of the respondent (O.P.) within prescribed time, but even then, the respondent (O.P.) did not pay the insured amount Rs. 10,47,607 to the appellant (complainant). The appellant (complainant) also submitted the documents, which were demanded from him by the respondent (O.P.) from time -to -time. The Investigator of the respondent (O.P.) told that the entire sponge was fully damaged. The sponge iron loaded in the above vehicle was insured by the respondent (O.P.) for all risks and under the insurance policy premium was obtained in respect of loss occurred while carrying the sponge iron from factory to other factor. The appellant (complainant) has not violated any terms and conditions of the insurance policy. The respondent (O.P.) without any ground did not settle the claim of the appellant (complainant) and committed deficiency in service. Therefore, the appellant (complainant) filed consumer complaint before the District Forum, and prayed for granting relief's as mentioned in the complaint.
(2.) The respondent (O.P.) filed its written statement and averred that Marine Cargo Special Declaration Policy was issued in favour of M/s. Raipur Power and Steel Company for the period from 16.12.2010 to 15.12.2011 under the terms and conditions mentioned in the policy in which there is mention regarding packaging of the sponge iron through open truck. The transportation of the sponge iron was done by the appellant (complainant) through truck bearing registration No. C.G.07 -E -8368. The weight of the above truck without loading is 8000 kg. and with loading its weight is 25000 kg. The permit for the above truck has been issued for 17000 kg weight and the weight of the above truck was 17000 kg (25000 - 8000). On the date of accident i.e. 16.8.2011, total 40.120 MTSponge Iron (16.120 MT through invoice No. 990) and 24.000 Sponge Iron through invoice No. 991) was taken by the appellant (complainant) to Nilesh Steel and Alloys Private Limited, Jalna (Maharashtra) by loading it in truck bearing registration No. C.G.07 -E -8368, whereas according to R.C. Book of truck and permit, the weight of the truck is 17000 kg. The truck did not fell down in the river on 16.8.2011 due to technical problem when it reached to Bagh Nadi, Bullard Paam. In the truck, the goods were transporting in excess than its capacity and the accident occurred due to negligent of the appellant (complainant), which is violation of terms and conditions of the Marine Insurance Policy. The respondent (O.P.) is not liable for paying any compensation to the appellant (complainant), therefore, the respondent (O.P.) did not pay any compensation to the appellant (complainant) After receiving intimation regarding the incident from the appellant (complainant), the respondent (O.P.) appointed Surveyor Shri D.K. Khedkar, who is an independent and licenced Surveyor, for conducting survey of the vehicle and sponge iron. Shri D.K. Khedkar, Surveyor conducted survey and submitted his report on 20.8.2011 before the respondent (O.P.) in which, he observed that the loading capacity of the truck is 17,000 kg. as against which 40,000 kg sponge iron was loaded in the truck. The appellant (complainant) gave Marine Declaration Form on 14.8.2011 to the respondent (O.P.) mentioning that in vehicle Truck bearing registration No. C.G.07 -E -8368, 40.120 M.TSponge Iron has been loaded and the same has been sent from Rashmadha to Jalna through bilty No. 2497 and 2498 and the insured value of the sponge iron is Rs. 10,47,607. Thus it is clear from the Declaration Form and Invoice and bilty that in the truck bearing registration No. C.G.07 -E -836840,000 kg. Sponge Iron was loaded and the same was being transported, which is more than the loading capacity of the truck i.e. 17,000 kg. Due to violation of the terms and conditions of the Marine Insurance Policy and provisions of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 the respondent (O.P.) did not pay a sum of Rs. 10,47,607 to the appellant (complainant). The respondent (O.P.) sent letter to the appellant (complainant) on 25.3.2013 and informed that as per Survey Report of Surveyor Shri D.K. Khedkar, the appellant (complainant) by violating terms and conditions of the insurance policy as well as provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1998, transporting the sponge iron in the truck, which is in excess than the loading capacity of the truck, which shows negligence of the appellant (complainant). The respondent (O.P.) demanded photocopy of driving licence of the driver, who was driving the vehicle at the time of incident and declaration No. 877 dated 14.8.2011 and load challan 2497 and 2498 dated 14.8.2011 within 7 days. The respondent (O.P.) vide their letter dated 2.9.2013 informed the appellant (complainant) that due to violation of the terms and conditions of the insurance policy and provisions of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the respondent (O.P.) is not liable to pay compensation to the appellant (complainant). Thus the respondent (O.P.) has not committed any deficiency in service. The appellant (complainant) was transporting sponge iron than the load capacity of the vehicle, which is violation of terms and conditions of the insurance policy and provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, therefore, there is no liability of the respondent (O.P.) and the claim of the appellant (complainant) is not payable. The respondent (O.P.) has not committed any deficiency in service. The complaint is liable to be dismissed.
(3.) Learned District Forum, after having considered the material placed before it by the parties, dismissed the complaint.;