DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

PATIALA.

                                      Consumer Complaint No. 456 of 5.12.2018

                                      Decided on:         25.1.2023

Vishavjeet Singh son of Sh.K.Y.Singh, Resident of House No.166, Street No.1A-12, Guru Nanak Nagar, Patiala-147001.

                                                                   …………...Complainant

                                      Versus

1. Bajaj Allianze General Insurance Company Limited, Ist Floor, Opposite State Bank of India Branch, Near Gurudwara Dukhniwaran Sahib, Railway Station Road, Patiala.

2. Bajaj Allianze General Insurance Company Ltd., Registered Head Office GE Plaza, Airport Road, Yerawada, Pune 411006 Tel.No.(091 20)66026666.

                                                                   …………Opposite Parties

Complaint under the Consumer Protection Act

QUORUM

                                      Hon’ble Mr.S.K.Aggarwal, President

                                      Hon’ble Mr.G.S.Nagi,Member         

PRESENT:                             Sh.K.S.Dhaliwal,counsel for complainant.

                                      Sh.Amit Gupta, counsel for OPs No.1&2.

 ORDER                                          

1. The instant complaint is filed by Vishavjeet Singh (hereinafter referred to as the complainant) against Bajaj Allianze General Insurance Co. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the OP/s) under the Consumer Protection Act ( for short the Act).
2. The averments of the complainant are as follows:

That the complainant got insured his car make Honda Amaze bearing registration No.PB-11-BP-7078 having engine No.00644, chassis No.100025, CC 1198, vide insurance policy No.OG-18-3259-1801-00000014 dated 14.11.2017, for the period from 19.11.2017 to 18.11.2018 with the total IDV of Rs.3,72,051/- and paid an amount of Rs.15751/- through net banking to the OP.

The car of the complainant met with an accident on 30.3.2018.Complainant informed the OPs through telephonically. On the advice of the OPs complainant got repaired his car from M/s Prestige Honda, who received from the complainant an amount of Rs.7766/- as repair charges. Surveyor was also appointed by the OPs who submitted his report but the OPs did not reimburse the said amount to the complainant .OPs wrote a letter dated 5.4.2018 stating therein that a claim has been found received by the complainant in respect of this vehicle in past so NCB claim should have been less than what has been provided to the complainant. Complainant gave explanation that car was got insured from New India Insurance Company who gave NCB to the extent of 25% and there is no claim during the insurance period. OPs lingered on the matter and ultimately rejected the claim on 8.5.2018 even OPs received Rs.1408/- more and issued fresh revised insurance policy with same policy period giving NCB @25% with the assurance that the claim will be paid. There is thus deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs.The complainant also suffered pain and mental agony.Consequently, prayer has been made for acceptance of the complaint.

3. Upon notice, OPs appeared through counsel and filed written statement having raised various preliminary objections. The plea of the OPs is that the complainant had obtained an online policy providing details on web portal for getting insured the vehicle in question, which was issued on the information and declaration provided by the complainant strictly subject to the terms and conditions of the policy on the assertion that no damage claim has been experienced by the complainant against the previous policy and has taken the benefit of no claim bonus discount to the tune of 35%.While obtaining the on-line policy, the complainant has mentioned that there was no claim raised against the previous policies and the complainant is entitled to NCB to the tune of 35%.The complainant has taken the claim of Rs.20,808/- from New India Assurance Co..The complainant called for explanation vide letters dated 5.4.2018 and 12.4.2018.Complainant sent clarification which was found to be not satisfactory and as such vide letter dated 8.5.2018, claim of the complainant was repudiated by the OPs.On merits, the OPs reiterated the facts taken in the preliminary objections which are not reiterated for the sake of brevity. After denying all other averments, the OPs have prayed for the dismissal of the complaint.
4. In support of the complaint, ld. counsel for the complainant has tendered in evidence Ex.C1  affidavit of the complainant, Ex.C2 copy of insurance policy, Ex.C3 copy of original revised policy, Ex.C4 invoice No.SR03198-94,Ex.C5 invoice No.SR03198/121,Ex.C6 receipt of payment of Rs.7766/-,Ex.C7 copy of letter of Bajaj Allianze dated 5.4.2018,Ex.C8 copy of reply of letter dated 5.4.2018, Ex.C9  letter of Bajaj Allianze dated 12.4.2018,Ex.C10 letter of Bajaj Allianze dated 17.4.2018,Ex.C11 letter of Bajaj Allianze dated 12.4.2018 and closed the evidence.
5. In rebuttal, ld. counsel for OPs has tendered in evidence Ex.OPA affidavit of Jai Singh, Sr.Executive,Legal, Ex.OPB affidavit of Lakhvir Singh,Surveyor,Ex.OP1 copy of policy,Ex.OP2 copy of policy alongwith documents.Ex.OP3 copy of letter dated 8.5.2018,Ex.OP4 copy of letter dated 17.4.2018,Ex.OP5 copy of dispatched sheet,Ex.OP6 copy of letter dated 12.5.2019, Ex.OP7 copy of dispatched sheet,Ex.OP8 copy of letter dated 5.4.2018,Ex.OP9 copy of letter dated 17.4.2018,Ex.OP10 copy of screen report, Ex.OP11 copy of claim form,Ex.OP12 copy of survey report and closed the evidence.
6. We have heard the ld. counsel for the parties and have also gone through the record of the case, carefully.
7. There is no dispute with regard to the fact that the complainant had purchased an insurance policy, Ex.C2 from the OPs valid for the period  19.11.2017 to 18.11.2018.It is admitted fact that the car of the complainant  met with an accident on 30.3.2018 and was got repaired from the authorized service centre i.e. M/s Prestige Honda , for a consideration of Rs.7766/-, Exs.C4 and C5.The claim of the complainant was repudiated by the OPs vide letter dated 8.5.2018,Ex.C11 on the ground that the complainant had claimed 35% of ‘No Claim Bonus’ and has concealed material facts as no such bonus was due to the complainant.
8. Ld.counsel for the OPs has placed on record letter dated 5.4.2018, Ex.OP8, letter dated 12.4.2018, Ex.OP6 and letter dated 17.4.2018,Ex.OP4, wherein the complainant was asked to clarify regarding the no claim bonus of 35% claimed by him at the time of issuance of the policy. However, the complainant failed to clarify the same and instead deposited another Rs.1408/- for revision of the insurance policy for the same period to cover up for the less premium paid on account of claim of 35% of NCB. From the above facts, it transpires that the complainant falsely claimed NO Claim Bonus of 35% and has concealed the material facts.
9. In a similar case of concealment of facts regarding the claim of ‘no claim bonus’  the Hon’ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission New Delhi, in revision petition No.2920 of 2015 titled as United India Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. M/s Jindal Poly Buttons Limited, has  held that,

“In case of the insured taking the insurance policy of the vehicle from new insurance company and it is established that the insured by making wrongful declaration has taken benefit of No Claim Bonus and where the insurer had failed to seek confirmation regarding correctness of the declaration submitted by the insured in support of plea for No Claim Bonus within the stipulated period as provided in GR 27 of Indian Motor Tariff, the insurer would not be justified in repudiating the insurance claim. However, because the insured had taken benefit of No Claim Bonus by making false declaration his insurance claim would be reduced proportionately”.

10. In view of the above, the complaint is partly allowed and we are of the opinion that the complainant is entitled to the payment of the claim made by him for the repair of the vehicle after making deduction of 35% from the said amount. As such the OPs are directed to settle the claim of the complainant after making deduction of 35% from the claimed amount. Parties are left to bear their own costs. Compliance of the order be made by the OPs within 30 days from the date of the receipt of certified copy of this order.
11.           The instant complaint could not be disposed of within stipulated period due to heavy rush of work, Covid protocol and for want of Quorum from long time.
85109252238716.  
85109252238717.  

                                              G.S.Nagi                           S.K.AGGARWAL

                                              Member                          President