BEFORE THE DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ADDITIONAL BENCH, MANGALORE
Dated this the 30th May 2017
PRESENT
SRI VISHWESHWARA BHAT D : HON’BLE PRESIDENT
SRI T.C. RAJASHEKAR : HON’BLE MEMBER
ORDERS IN
C.C.No.494/2014
(Admitted on 16.12.2014)
Mr. Kiran Kidiyoor,
S/o Sri. Jayasheela Kidiyoor,
Aged 34 years,
Thanthry lane, Kottara Mangalore, presently,
R/at Mathrushree Nilaya, Opp.Dattha Apartment,
Kantharaj Shetty Lane, Mannagudda,
Mangalore 03.
……… Complainant
(Advocate for Complainant by Sri. MCK)
VERSUS
- The Manager, (Motor claim),
Reliance General Insurance co. ltd,
No.28,5th floor, East Wing
Centenary Building,
M.G.Road, Bangalore-560001.
- The Manager,
Reliance General Insurance co. Ltd,
4th floor, Maximus Commercial complex,
Light House Hill Road,
Hampankatta, Mangalore 1.
…. Opposite Parties
(Advocate for Opposite Party No.1 and by Sr. KP)
ORDER DELIVERED BY HON’BLE PRESIDENT
SRI VISHWESHWARA BHAT D
This complaint is filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act alleging deficiency in service against the opposite party claiming certain reliefs.
The undisputed facts of the case are as under:
The complainant vehicle registration No. KA.19.MB.2752 insured with Opposite Party with validity period 6.9.2014. He met with an accident on 2.4.2014 at Madengeri Cross at Ankol. Complainant mentions on 10.4.2014 claim was made with Opposite Party for to damage caused to the vehicle on 10.4.2014 Opposite Party threatening to repudiate the claimed to which reply was sent by complainant. Total bill of Rs.21,841/ filed by complainant on 8.5.2014 Opposite Party threatened only Rs.15,534/ to complainant account. He also claims the policy provided for full coverage subject to compulsory deduction of Rs.2,000/. Hence by claiming that Opposite Party has not complied to demand including of Opposite Party seeks reliefs claimed in the complainant.
2. Opposite Party contends the amount of Rs.15,534/ was paid is full and final settlement which was excepted by complainant without protest. There was unexplained delay of 8 days in reporting the accident and loss to the Opposite Party no claim is entertainable as complainant claimed is settled as per the terms and conditions policy.
3. In support of the above complaint the complainant Mr. Kiran Kidiyoor, filed affidavit evidence as (CW1) and answered the interrogatories served on him and produced documents got marked at Ex.C1 to C11 as detailed in the annexure here below. On behalf of the opposite party Mr.Bharath, (RW1) Assistant Manager, also filed affidavit evidence answered the interrogatories served on him.
4. In view of the above said facts, the points for consideration in the case are:
- Whether the Complainant is a consumer and the dispute between the parties?
- If so, whether the Complainant is entitled for any of the reliefs claimed?
- What order?
The learned counsels for both sides filed notes of arguments. We have considered entire case filed on record including evidence tendered by the parties. Our findings on the points are as under are as follows:
Point No. (i) : Affirmative
Point No. (ii) : Affirmative
Point No. (iii): As per the final order.
REASONS
5. POINTS No. (i): The complainants vehicle covered under a policy issued by Opposite Party is and there by relationship of consumer and service provider between the parties is undisputed. Of Total claims of Rs.21,841/ Opposite Party paid only Rs. 15,534/ to complainant and did not paid entire amount. Hence there is dispute aspect to the on filed portion by Opposite Party, hence there is a live dispute between the parties as contemplated under section 2 (1) (e) C.P. Act. Hence we answer point no. 1 in the affirmative.
6. POINTS NO.(ii): To the question No.1 of the complainant’s interrogation RW1 Bharath as Assistant Manager of Opposite Party answered.
Q.No.1: Do you admit that policy in question is a comprehensive policy and except compulsory deductive amount of Rs.2,000/ you are liable to pay entire amount to the claimant?
Ans: Yes, comprehensive policy. But not liable to pay entire amount. It is only on the basis of survey report and terms and conditions of policy.
The learned counsel for complainant argued that the policy issued by Opposite Party to complainant marked Ex.C4, pointed out the terms under the heading and limits of liability and deductible under section 1.
(i) Compulsory deductible Rs.2,000/
(ii) Additional compulsory deductible Rs.0/
(iii) Voluntary deductible Rs. nil
As seen from the written arguments notes filed by Opposite Party there is no mention made to this clause in the policy pointed out by learned counsel for complainant. In fact even though Opposite Party claims there are documents for Rs.15,534/ by surveyor report no such documents are produced by Opposite Party to deduct complainant’s Rs. 6,534/ towards claim.
7. As we can make out from the version and affidavit evidence of Opposite Party and also the copy of reply to complainant the only ground given there is delay in making claim. In fact in the intimation given to complainant on 10.4.2014 mentioned is made of Ex.A1 which reads thus
We have received your claim intimation on 10.4.2014 for loss said to have occurred on 02.04.2014 entailing a delay of 08 days
In this regard, we refer to the policy condition No.1 notice shall be given to the company immediately upon the occurrence of any accident loss or damage in the event of any claim.
There is no clause as pointed out by Opposite Party policy. Condition 1 is not as mentioned by Opposite Party. In any case Opposite Party by paying Rs.15,534/ did admit liability under the policy. Hence complainant in our view established deficiency in service on the part of Opposite Party in not making payment of the claim made by complainant. Hence points no.2 answer in the Affirmative.
8. Opposite Parties shall be directed to pay Rs.4,307/ to complainant with interest at the rate of 9% p.a from the date 10.4.2014 i.e. date of Ex.C1 till the date of payment. Opposite Parties shall also be directed to pay Rs.5,000/ as compensation towards mental agony and hardship caused to the complainant and another Rs.5,000/ towards cost litigation.
Wherefore the following order
ORDER
The complaint is allowed with cost. Opposite Parties directed to pay Rs.4,307/ with interest at the rate of 9% p.a from 10.4.2014 till the date of payment.
2. Opposite Parties shall also directed to pay Rs.5,000/ as compensation.
3. Cost of Rs.5,000/ as litigation expenses.
4. Payment shall be made within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order.
Copy of this order as per statutory requirements, be forwarded to the parties free of cost and file shall be consigned to record room.
(Page No.1 to 6 dictated by President to the Stenographer typed by him, revised and pronounced in the open court on this the 30th May 2017)
MEMBER PRESIDENT
(T.C. RAJASHEKAR) (VISHWESHWARA BHAT D)
D.K. District Consumer Forum D.K. District Consumer Forum
Additional Bench, Mangalore Additional Bench, Mangalore
ANNEXURE
Witnesses examined on behalf of the Complainant:
CW1 Mr. Kiran Kidiyoor
Documents marked on behalf of the Complainant:
Ex.C1: 10.4.2014: Show-cause notice caused by the Opposite Party No.1 to complainant.
Ex.C2: 15.4.2014: Reply to the notice issued by the complainant to the Opposite Party No.1
Ex.C3: 11.7.2014: Office copy of the legal notice with postal receipt and AD, issued to Opposite Parties by the complainant.
Ex.C4: Policy schedule.
Ex.C5: 4.4.2014: FIR filed before judicial Magistrate first court, Ankola.
Ex.C6: 15.4.2014: Estimation from car touch, carz dealing centre, Kulur, Mangalore.
Ex.C7: 22.4.2014: Cash invoice of the Ganesh motors, Kottara Chowki, Mangalore.
Ex.C8: 17.4.2014: Invoice, Classic Agencies, Pumpwel, Mangalore.
Ex.C9: 24.4.2014: Credit memo of smile auto touch, Mangalore.
Ex.C10: Statement of Accounts of complainant.
Ex.C11: Account Statement.
Witnesses examined on behalf of the Opposite Parties:
RW1: Mr.Bharath, Assistant Manager
Documents marked on behalf of the Opposite Parties:
Nil
Dated: 30.05.2017 PRESIDENT
