Orissa

Sambalpur

CC/77/2017

Rabindra sahu - Complainant(s)

Versus

1-The National Insurance CO. Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Sri. P. Debata & S.K.Nath

03 Aug 2022

ORDER

PRESIDENT, DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SAMBALPUR

Consumer Case No-77/2017

Present-Dr. Ramakanta Satapathy, President,

  Sri. Sadananda Tripathy, Member,

Rabindra Sahu,

S/O-Raghu Sahu,

R/O-Parmanpur, Ps-Sason

Dist- Sambalpur, Odisha.                                                                 …..Complainant

 

Vrs.

1. The National Insurance co. Ltd,

Represented through its Chairman-cum-Managing Director

At-3, Middleton Street, Kolkata, 700071

2. The Sr. Divisional Manager, National Insurance Co. Ltd,

At-Nayapara, Golebazar, Sambalpur..….Opp. Parties

Counsels:-

1. For the Complainant      :-Sri. Pritish Debta Advocate & Associates.
2. For the O.P.s                    :- Sri. B.K.Purohit, Advocate & Associates.

 

DATE OF HEARING : 04.07.2022, DATE OF JUDGEMENT :03.08.2022

Presented by Dr. Ramakanta Satapathy, PRESIDENT.

1. The case of the Complainant is that the Complaint is the registered owner of Mahindra Bolero XL vehicle bearing Regd. No. OD-15-6700 being purchased from one Babulal Sahu and transferred the owner ship in his name. the vehicle was having policy No. 163400/31/16/6300000475 and valid from 28.05.2016-00.00 hrs to MN 27.05.2017. The fact of transfer was intimated to the O.Ps.

On 24.03.2017 the alleged vehicle met an accident and it was reported before BTM police out post. Claim No. 1634003117904-62427-001 was lodge before the O.Ps but vide letter no. 163400/claim dated 21.04.2017 the claim was repudiated by the O.Ps on the ground that the ownership has been transferred in the R.C. Book from 22.12.2016 but the ownership has not transferred in the insurance policy. The Complainant was not insured at the time of accident. In Mahendra workshop, Pardhiapali the Complainant made an expense of Rs. 66,077/- repairing the vehicle.

On 20.05.2017 an advocate notice was given claiming the damaged but the O.Ps did not respond.

Being aggrieved the Complainant filed this complaint.

2. The case of the O.Ps is that the O.Ps issued One passenger carrying four-wheeler package policy No. 163400/31/16/6300000475 in favour of Brusabh Sahu of Panimura, Kisinda, Sambalpur bearing No. OD-15-6700 and the policy was valid from 28.05.2016 to 27.05.2017. After the accident the O.Ps engaged Sri. Dhirendra Kumar Dash, Surveyor and loss Assessor who assessed the loss as Rs. 33,500/- and informed the O.Ps that vehicle ownership has been changed but the policy, permit, fitness and other vehicle papers has not been charged from Brusabha sahu to the Complainant. Vide letter dated 21.04.2016 but the ownership has not been changed within 14 days of the date of transfer. Due procedure has not been followed by the Complainant regarding transfer of insurance.

The Complainant is not a consumer of the O.Ps and cannot claim deficiency in service against O.Ps.

3. After perusal of the documents filed by both the parties the following issues are framed:
103606587.  

1. Is the Complainant not a ‘consumer’ of the O.Ps after change of ownership of the vehicle No. OD-15-6700 in his name?
2. Are the O.Ps deficient in providing service to the Complainant by repudiating the claim?
3. What relief the Complainant is entitled to get?

Issue No.1 Is the Complainant not a ‘consumer’ of the O.Ps after change of ownership of the vehicle No. OD-15-6700 in his name?

          The alleged vehicle No. OD-15-6700 stands registered in the name of the Complainant after the transfer from original owner Brusabha Sahu w.e.f 22.12.2016. No any documentary evidence has been filed by both the parties regarding date of entry of the name of Complainant. The alleged vehicle met an accident on 24.03.2017, about 10.30 PM and station Diary Entry No. 05 dated 25.03.2017 was made by B.T.M. out-post. As the time of accident Insurance Policy No. 163400/31/16/6300000475 was valid for the period 28.05.2016 to 27.05.2017 and the insured is Brusabh Sahu, who had already transferred the vehicle earlier. The policy in question is under a package policy. The principle laid down in section 157 of the Motor vehicle Act, 1988 is very specific.

          When one party wishes to transfer the ownership of vehicle, he has also to transfer the insurance policy to the new owner. The policy shall deem to be transferred to new owner from the date of its transfer. The procedures prescribed are:

1. The transferor shall have to apply within fourteen days from date of transfer to make days from date of transfer to make necessary changes with the concerned authority.
2. The registering authority on specific request from the transferor along with consent letter of transferor can make necessary change of ownership.
3. Fresh application form duly filled up is required for package policies to cover liability.
4. Fees of Rs. 50/- is to be paid for issuance of fresh certificate in the name of the transferee

In the present case the ownership in R.C. Book changed but no any changes prescribed under law has been followed. Accordingly the liability of the O.P. Company is limited to third party risk only. There is no agreement between the transferee and the Insurance Company to cover the risk of damages of the vehicle. The policy is not transferred by insurer to transferee. No contract exist between the Complainant and O.P. Accordingly the Complainant is not a ‘Consumer’ of the O.P. Decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India referred. M/s complete Insulation (P)ltd. Vs New India Assurance Co. ltd. AIR 1996 S.C. 856.

Accordingly the issue is answered in favour of the O.P.

Issue No.2 Are the O.Ps deficient in providing service to the Complainant by repudiating the claim?

          When the Complainant is not a ‘Consumer’ of the O.P. deficiency in service made by the O.P. does not arise.

Issue No.3 What relief the Complainant is entitled to get?

          Accordingly, as discussed supra the Complainant is not entitled for any relief.

          It is ordered:  

                                      ORDER

          The Complaint is dismissed on contest. The Complainant is not entitled for relief as claimed for.

          Order pronounced in open court on this 3^rd day of August 2022.

          Supply free copies to the parties.