State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Oriental Insurance Company Limited vs Lajja Devi & Ors. on 27 May, 2014
H.P. STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
SHIMLA.
First Appeal No.76/2014
Date of Presentation: 28.02.2014
Date of Decision: 27.05.2014
.........................................................................................
Oriental Insurance Company Limited,
Through its Senior Divisional Manager,
Mythe Estate, Kaithu, Shimla.
.... Appellant.
Versus
(1) Lajja Devi, wife of late Shri Jagmohan;
(2) Saroj Sharma, Mother of late Shri Jagmohan;
(3) Kumari Tanika, daughter of late Shri Jagmohan;
(4) Kumari Divya, daughter of late Shri Jagmohan;
(5) Minakshi, daughter of late Shri Jagmohan (Minor);
(6) Kumari Natasha, daughter of late Shri Jagmohan (Minor);
(Respondents No.5 & 6, through their mother & Natural
Guardian, Smt. Lajja Devi, wife of Shri Jagmohan);
All Residents of Ward No.2, Rewalsar Nagar Panchayat,
Tehsil Sadar, District Mandi, H.P.
... Respondents.
.........................................................................................
Coram
Hon'ble Mr. Justice (Retd.) Surjit Singh, President
Hon'ble Mrs. Prem Chauhan, Member
Whether approved for reporting?1 Yes.
For the Appellant: Mr. Anil Tomar, Advocate.
For the Respondents: Ms. Leena Guleria, Advocate.
.................................................................................
1
Whether Reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the order?
Oriental Insurance Company Limited Vs. Lajja Devi & Ors.
(F.A. No.76/2014)
____________________________________________________________
O R D E R:
Justice (Retd.) Surjit Singh, President (Oral) M.A. No.405/2014.
A cheque for the remaining amount of money, payable in terms of impugned order, has been submitted. Amount of the cheque is `1,98,423/-. Money be invested in a fixed deposit in the same bank, in which the money initially deposited by the appellant, has been invested. Disposed of.
F.A. No.76/2014.
2. Present appeal, under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, is directed against the order dated 30.12.2013, of learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Mandi, whereby a complaint, under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, filed by the respondents against the present appellant, has been allowed and a direction given to it (the appellant), to pay a sum of ` 2.00 lacs, by way of insurance money, with interest at the rate of 9% per annum, from the date of filing of the complaint, to the date of its realization and also to pay `4,000/-, as compensation and a sum of `3,000/-, as litigation cost.
Page 2 of 6 Oriental Insurance Company Limited Vs. Lajja Devi & Ors.
(F.A. No.76/2014) ____________________________________________________________
3. Deceased-Jagmohan, owned a vehicle, bearing registration No.HP-24A-0119, which was insured with the appellant. Insurance policy, inter alia, covered the risk of death of the insured, in an accident of the insured vehicle and in that event, a sum of `2.00 lacs was payable. During the currency of insurance policy, vehicle met with an accident on 18.02.2012. Insured himself was driving the vehicle, at the time when accident took place. He sustained serious injuries and was taken to a nearby private hospital, where he remained admitted upto 23rd February, 2012. From the private hospital was referred to Indira Gandhi Medical College & Hospital, Shimla, where he died on 26.02.2012. Report with the police was lodged, only after the death of insured, by his brother-in-law.
4. A claim was lodged with the appellant by the respondents for payment of `2.00 lacs, on account of insurance money. The same was repudiated on the ground that deceased was under the influence of liquor, at the time when accident took place. Page 3 of 6 Oriental Insurance Company Limited Vs. Lajja Devi & Ors.
(F.A. No.76/2014) ____________________________________________________________
5. Respondents felt aggrieved by the action of the appellant and filed a complaint, under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
6. Appellant contested the complaint and pleaded that not only that the deceased was drunk, when the accident had taken place, but also he did not possess a valid and effective driving licence, to drive the vehicle. Learned District Forum, has rejected both the pleas, raised by the appellant, in the reply and allowed the complaint.
7. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record.
8. Vehicle, in question, was a Maruti Van, which is admittedly a 'Light Motor Vehicle'. Licence of the deceased is available on the record of learned District Forum, as Annexure C-VI. Licence authorizes the holder to drive motorcycle with gear, with effect from 11.01.1999 and LMV with effect from 05.07.2011. Accident had taken place on 18.02.2012. That means, the deceased had a valid and effective licence to drive the vehicle, in question, at the time when accident took place.
Page 4 of 6 Oriental Insurance Company Limited Vs. Lajja Devi & Ors.
(F.A. No.76/2014) ____________________________________________________________
9. As regards the second ground, viz., the deceased was under the influence of liquor, a reliance is placed by the appellant on discharge card, Annexure R-3, wherein while recording the history, it is noted down that this was a case of roadside accident/last night (patient was in alcoholic condition). That means, this observation regarding the deceased being in alcoholic condition was made on the day, next following the date (night time), on which accident had taken place. Also, observation gives the impression that doctor himself, did not observe that deceased was drunk, but he was told that he was in alcoholic condition. Also, it is quite likely that deceased was made to consume alcohol, only after the accident had taken place, to relieve him of the pain caused by the injuries, sustained in the accident. Injuries which he sustained, were of serious nature, as is made out from the post-mortem report, Annexure C-5, per which there was fracture and dislocation of right hip joint, besides a head injury, which resulted in death.
10. In any case, there is no evidence showing as to what was the extent of liquor in the blood of the Page 5 of 6 Oriental Insurance Company Limited Vs. Lajja Devi & Ors.
(F.A. No.76/2014) ____________________________________________________________ deceased and, therefore, it cannot be said that the percentage of liquor in the blood was so high as to affect the cognitive abilities of the deceased and to render him disqualified to drive the vehicle.
11. Consequently, appeal is dismissed.
12. A copy of this order be sent to each of the parties, free of cost, as per Rules.
(Justice Surjit Singh) President (Prem Chauhan) Member May 27, 2014.
*dinesh* Page 6 of 6