NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION NEW DELHI REVISION PETITION No. 2405 OF 2007 (From the Order dated 28.02.2007 in Appeal No. 68 of 2006 of the State Commission, Uttar Pradesh). New India Assurance Co. Ltd Petitioner Palia Kalan By-Pass Road Lakhimpur Kheri through Assistant Manager, Legal Cell The New India Assurance Co. Ltd 94 M G Marg, Hazratganj, Lucknow Regional Office at Jeevan Bharti Level V, Tower II Cannaught Circus New Delhi Through its Manager Versus Pal Singh Respondent Son of Shri Ugat Singh Resident of Khaira Farm Pargana Moodh Tehsil Gola, P S Bheera District Kheri Uttar Pradesh BEFORE: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE M.B.SHAH, PRESIDENT MRS. RAJYALAKSHMI RAO, MEMBER MR. ANUPAM DASGUPTA, MEMBER For the Petitioner Shri Pramod Dayal, Advocate Shri Nikunj Dayal, Advocate For the Respondent Shri Devvrat, Advocate Dated the 20th November, 2007. ORDER
Heard the Learned Counsel for the parties.
In
complaint No. 191 of 1995, the District Forum by its order dated 21st
April, 1998, directed the Insurance Company to pay a sum of Rs.1,90,000/- with
interest @ 12% per annum from the date of the accident till the date of its
payment. It also directed that in case the payment was not made within the
aforesaid period, the rate of interest would be 18% per annum.
Against
that order, the Insurance Company preferred an appeal No. 1293 of 1998 (S/C)
before the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Uttar Pradesh on 14th
May, 1998. On the stay application filed
by the Insurance Company in the context of that appeal, the State Commission by
its order dated 24th August, 1998 directed the Insurance Company to
deposit the entire amount awarded by the District Forum.
The
interim order is as under:
Heard Learned Counsel for the appellant and perused
order dated 21st April, 1998 passed by District Forum, Lakhimpur
Kheri in complaint case No. 191 of 1995.
Keeping in view of the facts of the case, it is
directed that if the appellant complies with the order of the District Forum by
depositing the entire amount within a period of six weeks from today by means
of a F D R of a nationalized bank for a period three yeas in the name of the
President of the District Consumer Forum then the operation of the above
mentioned order shall remain stayed till the pendency of appeal. The warrant of
arrest if issued shall also remain stayed.
Hence, on 17th September, 1998 Insurance
Company deposited an FDR for Rs.1,90,000/-. Thereafter the stay order
continued.
Finally, the State Commission dismissed the appeal
No. 1293 of 1998 (S/C) on 02nd August, 2005. After dismissal of the
appeal, the complainant filed an execution application before the District
Forum. The Insurance Company also preferred application in the said execution
case, that the Insurance Company was entitled to recover Rs.83,488/- which had
been paid in excess.
After hearing the parties, the District Forum, by its
order dated 21st February, 2006 in Execution Case No. 242 of 1998,
directed the Insurance Company to pay a sum of Rs.1,04,600/- with a specific
penal clause, viz., in case the amount is not paid within one month, the
complainant would be entitled to compoundable interest @ 18% per annum and
legal action in accordance with law would be taken.
Against that order the petitioner – Insurance Company
preferred Revision Petition No. 68 of 2006. That Revision Petition was
dismissed without verifying the records, by the State Commission by its order
dated 28th February, 2007.
Against that order, this Revision Petition is filed.
Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Insurance
Company submitted that the State Commission has passed the order without
verifying the facts and hence it is, on the face of it, erroneous. He submitted
that against the original order passed by the District Forum on 21st
April, 1998, the Insurance Company preferred an appeal. In that appeal, the
Insurance Company had filed application for interim relief; that interim relief
was granted by the State Commission by its order dated 24th August,
1998; and the Insurance Company was directed to deposit the amount awarded by
the District Forum. In compliance with that order, a sum of Rs.1,90,000/- was
deposited by way of FDR on 17th September, 1998. He, therefore,
contended that there was no question of paying any interest after 17th
September, 1998. He further submits that the directions to pay penal interest @
18% would not survive in view of the stay order granted by the State
Commission. He, therefore, contended that neither the District Forum nor the
State Commission took into consideration the relevant facts and passed the
impugned orders.
As against this, the learned Counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was required to wait for
the recovery of the amount for 11 years and, therefore, the impugned order
passed by the District Forum did not call for any interference. He, submitted
that the petitioner was entitled to recover the amount with interest as
directed by the District Forum, i.e. to say, @ 12% per annum from the date of
accident till the payment and also @ 18% per annum for the delay.
In our view, the impugned order passed by the
District Forum cannot be justified because of the interim relief/ stay order
granted by the State Commission. The State Commission directed the Insurance
Company to deposit the amount awarded by the District Forum with the District
Forum in the form of FDR. That order was complied with by the Insurance
Company. Complainant has not asked for modification of the said order nor for
vacation of the said order nor he had applied for withdrawal of the said amount
deposited with the District Forum. Therefore, the complainant is entitled to
recover the amount of Rs.1,90,000/- with 12% interest from the date of
accident, i.e., 05th October, 1994 till the date of its deposit,
i.e., 17th September 1998. For that, interest amount comes to
Rs.90,075/- Admittedly, that amount is not paid by the Insurance Company.
On the contrary, false and frivolous plea was raised
in the execution case by the Insurance Company that it was entitled to recover
a sum of Rs.90,000/- to Rs.1,00,000/- as salvage value. Such type of frivolous
plea has created difficulties for the complainant. No doubt, that plea was
rightly rejected by the Executing Court by observing that Executing Court could
not go beyond the original order.
Further, it is to be stated that on the basis of the
FDR deposited by the Insurance Company for a sum of Rs.1,90,000/- on
17.09.1998, the complainant recovered that amount with accrued interest on 28th
September, 2005. That is to say, he received in all Rs.3,18,000/-.
In this view of the matter, the order passed by the
District Forum calculating the rate of interest @ 18% per annum requires to be
set aside and directions to pay a sum of Rs.1,04,600/- is also required to be
modified.
In the result, the Insurance Company is directed to
pay a sum of Rs.90,075/- which is the interest amount payable by it on the sum
of Rs.1,90,000/- awarded by the District Forum. The said amount shall be paid
within a period of four weeks from today. The Insurance Company is also
directed to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- as cost of litigation.
In the result, the revision petition is partly
allowed. In all, the Insurance Company is directed to pay a sum of
Rs.1,00,075/- within a period of four weeks from today to the complainant.
J
[ M.B. SHAH ]
President
[ RAJYALAKSHMI RAO ]
MEMBER
[ ANUPAM DASGUPTA ]
MEMBER
Satish 11