Orissa

Kendujhar

CC/35/2015

1. Jarina Khatoon - Complainant(s)

Versus

1. Branch Manager, National Insurance Co. Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Sri R.R. Rana

20 Jan 2016

ORDER

IN THE COURT OF THE PRESIDENT DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KENDUJHAR

CONSUMER COMPLAINT CASE NO. 35 OF 2015

1. Jarina Khatoon, aged about 34 years,

   Wife of Late Firoz Mahammad@Md. Firoz,

2. Md. Roshan, aged about 18 years,

   S/o- Late Firoz Mahammad@Md. Firoz,

3. Md. Murad, aged about 16 years,

   S/o- Late Firoz Mahammad@Md. Firoz,

   (Md. Murad being a minor, he is represented

   through his mother guardian namely,

   Jarina Khatoon, the complainant No.1

   All are of Thakurani Dalki Basti,

   Ward No. 2 (P), Via/P.S- Barbil,

   Dist- Keonjhar, Pin- 758035, Odisha         ……………………Complainants

                                  Vrs

1. Branch Manager,

    National Insurance Co. Ltd.

    Barbil Branch, Main Road,

    At/P.O/P.S- Barbil, Dist- Keonjhar

2. Divisional Manager,

    National Insurance Co. Ltd.

    Cantonment Road, Cuttack, Odisha         ……………………Op. Parties

PRESENT: - Shri A.K. Purohit, President

                   Mrs B. Giri,           MEMBER (W)

                   Sri S.C. Sahoo,      MEMBER

Advocate for the complainant - Shri Rajesh Ranjan Rana

Advocate for the O.Ps               - Sri N.G. Das

____________________________________________________________________________________________________  

Date of Hearing - 05.01.2016                              Date of Order- 20.01.2016

____________________________________________________________________________________________________

Sri S.C. Sahoo, Member-This is a Complaint filed by the legal heirs on the death of the consumer Md. Firoz praying that the O.Ps be directed to pay Rs.10,32,000/- towards insurance claim of Md. Firoz as per terms and conditions of insurance policy along with Rs.50,000/- for compensation and Rs.5000/- towards cost of litigation.

      The brief facts of the complaint is in nutshell that the above noted persons in the cause list are the legal heirs of the deceased consumer Md. Firoz have filed this case U/s 2 (1) (b) of sub section-v that the deceased Md. Firoz had purchased the vehicle bearing regd. No. OR-02-BH-3629 (Scorpio Hawk 2WD BS3) by obtaining finance from Bank of India, Barbil Branch, Keonjhar and the vehicle was got insured with the O.P-2 as private car vide policy No.163301/31/10/6100000718 which was valid from 24.8.2010 to 23.8.2011 for his own use. The said vehicle was taken away by some miscreants by intimidating at gun point and abducted the deceased Md. Firoz on 15.1.11 at about 1.30 pm while the deceased had been proceeding to Barbil Railway Station and on the same day at about 5 pm complainant No.1 (cause list) had received a tele call from her husband (Md. Firoz) but the said call was interrupted precluded her husband was at jurudi and some wrong was there with her husband. The kith & kins of Md. Firoz tried their level best to trace out him along with the vehicle till evening of 16.1.11 and having untraced the elder brother of Md. Firoz namely Md. Punu intimated the Police Station at Barbil and the Police failed to trace out Md. Firoz as well as the vehicle. The dead body of Md. Firoz was traced out/found at Jharkhand on 17.1.11 informed by one Biswanath Behera of West Singhbhum, Jharkhand. Kumardungi Police Station took up investigation and transferred the case to Barbil Police Station which was registered P.S Case No. 167, dt.14.10.12 U/s. 394/302/201/34 I.P.C. But the Police could not trace out the vehicle or the culprits/ miscreants and finally submitted final form No.205, dt.31.12.2013. The insurer was intimated and very much aware about the incident from the beginning and the claim was registered vide Claim No. 163301/31/10/6190000034 on receipt of information from deceased elder brother Md. Punu of which the claim was repudiated vide letter dt.26.2.2014 that the vehicle was used for commercial purpose as per their investigator report on the way to Barbil Railway Station the insured was killed by passengers and fled away the vehicle. Hence this case:

         In support filed:

1. R.C book of Scorpio bearing Regd. No. OR-02-BH-3629

2. Policy Certificate of aforesaid vehicle

3. D.L of Owner bearing No.49/F/98 and Challan dated 21.12.2010 for its renewal

4. Legal Heir Certificate issued in favour of the Complainants

5. Death Certificate of Md. Firoz @ Firoz Mahammad 

6. Extract of S.D.E No. 336, dated 16.01.2011, (Barbil P.S)

7. Policy papers consist of 7 sheets both (Kumardungi P.S of Jharkhand and Barbil P.S)

8. Order dt.18.01.2014 passed by J.M.F.C, Barbil in G.R. No. 631/2012

9. Letter dated 26.02.2014 from the Insurer

        After service of notice the Ops appeared and filed their version stating that the petition is not maintainable and there is no cause of action and the vehicle was insured as private car and the said vehicle was used as Taxi for carrying passengers on hire at the time of theft on 15.1.11 i.e. date of incident that the vehicle was used for commercial purpose instead of Own use/ Private use in contravention the terms and conditions of policy and driving license of the deceased Md. Firoz bearing D.L No. 49/F/98, dt.16.11.98 was valid from 16.11.2007 to 15.11.2010 at DTO, Chaibasa and the D.L was not valid/ effective at the time of occurrence on 15.1.11 and the Ops have rightly repudiated the claim on the grounds of violation of terms and conditions of Insurance Policy and the insured failed to take reasonable care to safeguard the vehicle and no deficiency on their part. Hence, the petition be dismissed.     

In support filed:

1.  Copy of Insurance Policy                                                         - 4 Sheets

2.  Report of Investigator                                                              - 2 Sheets

3.  Copy of D.L of Md. Firoz                                                        - 1 Sheet

4.  Copy of S.D.E No. 336 dt.16.01.2011                                     - 1 Sheet

5.  Letter of Md. Punu dt.5.11.2011                                              - 2 Sheets

6.  Letter of Complainant Jarina Khatoon                                     - 2 Sheets

7.  Copy of news paper publication                                               - 2 Sheets

8.  Copy of final Form in G.R No. 631/2012 J.M.F.C, Barbil      - 2 Sheets

     Heard the learned counsel for the contesting parties and gone through the materials available in record. At the outset it reveals from the said insurance policy that the actual valid period of insurance was from 24.8.2010 to 23.8.2011 for the sum IDV amount of Rs.8,32,000/- for the said vehicle and Rs.2,00,000/- for P.A to owner- cum- driver as per the policy.

     The learned counsel for the complainant submitted that the incident is not disputed by the Ops. The only dispute arised by the Ops that the said vehicle was used as Taxi instead of private car since the policy certificate of insurance was of private car and the vehicle was used as commercial purpose.

     In this context the counsel for complainant submitted that on 15.1.11 at about 1.30 pm the deceased owner himself was driving and proceeded towards Barbil Railway Station and on the way miscreants intimidating at gun point abducted the deceased and fled away the vehicle and the contentions in the version and argument of the Ops as raised for use of commercial purpose is not at all true and have no evidence on this plea.

     On the other hand the counsel for the Ops submitted that the deceased owner driver had driving license vide No. 49/F/98, dt.16.11.98 was valid from 16.11.2007 to 15.11.2010 issued by DTO Chaibasa and the said D.L was not valid/ effective at the time of occurance on 15.1.11 since renewal of D.L was lapsed but in this context the learned counsel for complainant submitted that prior to occurrence the deceased driver/ owner has applied for renewal of his license and deposited the required fees within the prescribed time for renewal as per M.V Act and as such the D.L of the deceased was valid license and never concocted as invalid D.L.

     With these pleadings, arguments and materials available on record it is believed that the D.L of the deceased owner/ driver was valid and the vehicle was not used as Taxi for commercial purpose since the Ops have not produced any evidence to prove their case nor have filed any affidavit evidence of the investigator of Ops and are liable for deficiency of service.

    Under the aforesaid discussion and materials available on record the Ops are liable to compensate the deceased consumer Md. Firoz.

ORDER

  Hence, the Ops are directed to pay Rs.7,50,000/- towards Insurance Claim of the said vehicle and Rs.2,00,000/- towards P.A for Owner/Driver to the complainant or to the financer if claimed, along with 10,000/- towards compensation for harassment & mental agony and towards cost of litigation within 30 days of receipt of this order failing which the entire amount Rs.9,60,000/- will carry an interest @ 10% p.a till realization.  

Accordingly the Case is disposed of.

 

                                                                  I agree                                    I agree

  (Sri S.C. Sahoo)                                 (Smt. B. Giri)                        (Sri A.K. Purohit)                      

        Member                                       Member (W)                                President                               

D.C.D.R.F, KEONJHAR               D.C.D.R.F, KEONJHAR         D.C.D.R.F, KEONJHAR

                           

                                                                                    Dictated & Corrected by me

                                                                                            (Sri S.C. Sahoo)                                                                                             MEMBER, DCDRF, KEONJHAR