ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. THROUGH ITS CHIEF MANAGER Vs. SHRI RAJNESH TANDON

JUDGEMENT

(1.) REVISION Petition No. 1569 of 2007 has been filed under section 21(B) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the order dated 06.12.2006 passed by the Himachal Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Shimla ('the State Commission') in Appeal No. 50 of 2005. The brief facts of the case as per the respondent/complainant are that the respondent purchased a TATA Sumo Maxi Cab registration No. HP 02 - 8314 in November 1997. The vehicle No., HP 02 -8314 was purchased by the respondent for the purpose of earning livelihood by way of self -employment after obtaining a loan from the Canara Bank, the Mall, Shimla, Himachal Pradesh at a high rate of interest. Vehicle No. HP 02 8314 was got insured by the respondent with the petitioner -insurance company on 25.10.2000 for a sum of Rs. 2,80,000/ -. The premium amount of Rs. 5791/ - was duly paid and the insurance was valid from 27.10.2000 to 26.10.2001.

(2.) TATA Sumo No. HP 02 8314 owned by the respondent was insured with the petitioner and unfortunately met with an accident on 30.07.2001 near Karara Ghat when the vehicle was on its way from Darlaghat to Kashlog. The vehicle all of a sudden gathered speed and went off the road and fell into a 250 feet deep gorge. The factum of accident of the Tata Sumo was immediately intimated to the insurance company on 31.07.2001 itself telephonically by the respondent. On being intimated of the accident, the insurance company appointed one Mr. Dogra as spot surveyor to inspect the spot of accident and the vehicle and submitted his detailed report. Mr. Dogra visited the spot of accident on the very next day and directed the respondent to remove the vehicle from the place of accident and further to submit the registration certificate of the vehicle, road permit, insurance cover note, driving licence of driver, FIR of the accident and an estimate of repairs of the vehicle to the insurance company at the earliest for settlement of the claim. The respondent accordingly, submitted the insurance claim in the last week of August 2001, and requested for early settlement of the claim.

(3.) AS stated supra the respondent had purchased the vehicle No. HP 02 8314, after obtaining loan from the Canara Bank at a high rate of interest. Since the vehicle in question had met with an accident the respondent was in precarious situation as the loan amount was mounting day by day. The only source of livelihood of the respondent had been ruined and he has not even in a position to maintain himself and his family members what to talk of repayment of the loan instalments. Taking advantage of the respondent's tight position in the OP insurance company through its officials coerced and pressurised the respondent into accepting and amount of Rs. 75,000/ - as full and final settlement of the claim and retain the salvage. The respondent was threatened that in case he refused to give his consent the insurance company would ensure that not a single penny was paid to him. When asked the reasons why the assessed amount of the surveyor was being reduced from 1,10,000/ - to Rs. 76,000/ - it was stated that the respondent's claim was non -standard. Moreover, it was assured that in case the respondent consented to receiving Rs. 76,000/ - for the present, the insurance company may think of increasing the amount to Rs. 1,10,000/ -. Forced by the circumstances and the misrepresentation made by the officials of the insurance company the respondent consented to receive Rs. 76,000/ - as full and final settlement of his claim on 27.11.2001.