PRESIDENT, DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SAMBALPUR

Consumer Complaint No.- 210/2023

Present-Dr. Ramakanta Satapathy, President,

  Sri. SadanandaTripathy, Member,

Smt. Beenapani Sahu,

D/O- Sri. Hrushikesh Sahu, W/O- Sri. Manoj Kumar Sahoo,

Permanent R/O- Malti Subanpur, PO-MaltiGunderpur,Ps-Dhama,

Dist-Sambalpur, -768005, Odisha.

At present residing at Charchack, PO-Jhadrajingi, PO-Puruna Cuttack,

Dist- Baud-762023, Odisha                                            ………........Complainant

-Vrs.-

1. The General Manager(Workshop), Odyssey Motors, Sambalpur,

At/PO-Ainthapali, Ps-Ainthapali,

Dist-Sambalpur, Odisha-768004

2. The General Manager, Maruti Suzuki Insurance Broking Pvt. Ltd.

1, Nelson Mandela Road, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070.

3. The Zonal Chief Manager, Universal Sompo GIC Ltd.

Second Floor, 461, Goutam Nagar,

Bhubaneswar, Dist-Khorda-751014.                     .....................Opp.Parties

Counsels:-

1. For the Complainant         :- Sri.A.Panigrahi
2. For the O.P.No.1                :- Sri. P.K.Kar. & Associates
3. For the O.P.No.2                :- Sri. R.Agrawal & Associates
4. For O.P.No.3                      :- Sri. B.K. Purohit

Date of Filing:20.11.2023,  Date of Hearing :30.09.2024,  Date of Judgement :11:11.2024

Presented by Dr. Ramakanta Satapathy, PRESIDENT

1. The case of the Complainant is that Complainant purchased a Maruti Wagon RVXI BSIV from O.P.No.1 and the O.P.No.2 insured the vehicle with insurance company from time to time. During 2023 O.P.No.3 insured the vehicle for the period 17.02.2023 to 16.02.2024.

During March 2023 front bumber of the vehicle was damaged O.P.No.1 was informed. The O.P.No.1 did not repair the spotted damage and advised to come after six months as the Complainant was plying the vehicle at Hyderabad by that time. In October-2023 the Complainant came back to her village and requested O.P.No.1 to repair the vehicle. The O.P.No.1 refused on the ground that O.P.No.3 is not agreed to pay the claim amount. The vehicle with O.P.No.1 for 7 days. The O.Ps harassed the Complainant and not settled the claim. Being aggrieved complaint has been filed.

2. The O.P.No.1 submitted that vehicle was purchased by Complainant in February, 2016. Through O.P.No.2, O.P.No.3 insured the vehicle for the period 17.02.2023 to 16.02.2024. During October, 2023 O.P.No.3 not agreed to pay the claim as it was old. In case of non-payment by O.P.No.3, O.P.No.1 cannot repair the vehicle. The dispute is between complainant and O.P.No.3 which is relating to delayed claim. O.P.No.1 is ready to repair subject to payment of repair cost.
3. The O.P.No.2 submitted that the O.P.No.2 is an insurance facilitator and dispute of the Complainant is with O.P.No.3, insurer. O.P.No.2 is not a necessary party.
4. The O.P. No.3, insurer submitted that policy was issued by O.P. No.3 through O.P.No.2 for the vehicle NO. TS-07-EZ-2263 for the period 17.02.2023 to 16.02.2024. Claim No. CL23280426 was registered and Sri Satyajit Pattanaik was appointed as Surveyor & Loss assessor who found that the Claim was for second claim within policy period. In claim No. CL23280426 repairing of hood and additional few parts claim made. Damage to the hood in the form of inward bending near middle of the front noticed. In the first claim the hood had same damages. So its was concluded that the damages sustained by the hood existed prior to the date of loss i.e. 26.10.2023 mentioned in claim form. The insurer repudiated the claim. There is no deficiency on the part of the answering O.P.
5. Perused the documents filed by Complainant and O.P.No.3. The Complainant filed job card dated 21.10.2023, mail correspondences with O.P.No.1 and 3, job card tax invoice dated 21.03.2023. The O.P.No.3 submitted final survey report dated 19.12.2023, and Motoveys dated 01.11.2023 of the surveyor.
6. The Complainant submitted that the vehicle was repaired by O.P.No.1 but the spotted damage both on the front and back side not repaired during March 2023. Second time when the vehicle was placed before O.P.No.1 for repair but O.P.No.1 refused as O.P.No.3 not agreed to pay the claim.

From survey report dated 19.12.2023 it reveals that the insured vehicle met accident on 26.10.2023 at about 7.00 PM near Sambalpur. The accident took place when the I.V. was following a leading T.P. Auto in Traffic congested area. At that time T.P. vehicle suddenly braked and stopped abruptly. Before the driver of the I.V. dashed near of the T.P. vehicle. After collision the I.V. stopped and following T.P. vehicle collided with the near of the I.V. The claim of the Complainant is Rs. 16,685.20P. Whereas the surveyor assessed and recommended for non-payment of the claim.

The surveyor remarked:

“This is the 2^nd claim of the I.V. in the same policy period. In this current claim i.e. Claim No. CL 23280426 repairing of the hood has been claimed in addition to few other parts. Damages to the hood in the form of inward bending near middle of the front noticed. (Photo No. 6,5). However the hood had same damages in the previous claim. So it can be concluded that the damages sustained by the hood existed prior to the date of loss i.e. 26.10.2023 mentioned in the claim form. The claim form is supposed to be the declaration of actual facts by the insured. But in this case previous damages of the hood have been claimed in this claim which is clear case of misrepresentation of material facts which leads to breached of utmost good faith.

The Complainant not submitted the claim forms to substantiate her case. For the same damages claim has been made twice. The Complainant has not come to the Commission with clean hand. Further as the O.P.No.3 repudiated the claim without payment the Complainant cannot insist the O.P.No.1 to repair the vehicle. The O.P.No.2 is an insurance facilitator and not a necessary party to the complaint.”

Taking into consideration the circumstances of the case complaint has no merit. Accordingly complaint is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 11^th day of Nov, 2024.

Supply free copies to the parties.