National Consumer Disputes Redressal
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Srinivas Trading Co. on 14 September, 2001
ORDER
1. This Appeal has arisen out of the order of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kerala. The brief facts giving rise to this appeal are as under:-
That the Complainant/Respondent had taken a fire insurance policy for the period from 7.7.90 to 6.7.91 in respect of shop of the Respondent. A fire broke out in the shop on 13.1.91 and several items therein were fully destroyed and some items were partly destroyed. Claim was lodged by the Respondent with the insurer through its Bankers for a sum of S. 3,70,000/- on 1.4.91. The case was investigated and was settled at Rs. 2,52,838/-. The Respondent gave a voucher on 28.8.91 in full and final settlement of his claim in respect of the said fire and the payment was received by him on 1.9.91 without any protest or demur. Thereafter, on 14.9.91, he wrote to the Petitioner saying that he was forced to give voucher in full and final settlement of the claim. He has not alleged fraud or undue influence or any kind of pressure being brought to bear upon him by the Petitioner. The only reason was that he had many commitments to be satisfied and that any delay in getting the payment would have caused great difficulty to him.
2. In the light of this evidence, we do not find that any case has ben made out for Fora under the Consumer Protection Act to go behind such full and final settlement. The protest lodged by the respondent was not simultaneous with the execution of full and final settlement receipt neither it followed such execution immediately nor was any reason like undue influence, coercion or fraud being exercised by the Petitioner pleaded. In the light of these situations and in the light of law discussed in the impugned order we consider that the State Commission arrived at the correct decision. However, the State Commission has taken into consideration the long delay in settling the claim but we feel that it was not justified in awarding interest from the date of the occurrence of fire. The time of three months has been considered reasonable by this Commission in earlier cases or two months from the date of submission of the report by the Surveyor because it is not possible for the insurance company to settle the claim on the date of occurrence itself and reasonable time has to be allowed. For that reason we only modify the impugned order to the extent that interest payable as directed by the State Commission would be for the period from 13.4.91 to 28.8.91 and not from 13.1.91 to 28.8.91. The rate of interest awarded for long delay in the facts and circumstances also appears to be on higher side and is hereby reduced to 12%. This Appeal is disposed of with the above modifications without any orders to costs.