BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, AMRITSAR.
Consumer Complaint No. 385 of 2023
Date of Institution: 10.7.2023
Date of Decision:9.10.2024
S. Jagtar Singh aged 59 S/o S. Bhagat Singh R/o VPO Jethuwal, Tehsil and District Amritsar Mobile No. 98772-36504
Complainant
Versus
- Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Ltd. having its Regd. office at Bajaj Allianz House, Airport Road, Yerwada, Pune-411006 through its Auth.Signatory
- Bajaj Allianz General Insu. Company Ltd., Claim department at SCO 156-159, 2nd Floor, Sector 9-C, Chandigarh 160009 through its MD/Auth.Signatory/Principal Officer
- Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Ltd, having its local office at SCO -5, 2nd Floor (SF-5) District Shopping Centre, B-Block, Ranjit Avenue, Amritsar through its Branch Manager/Auth.Signatory
Opposite Parties
Complaint under section 34 & 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019
Result : Complaint Allowed
Counsel for the parties :
For the Complainant : Sh. S.K.SharmaAdvocate
For the Opposite Parties : Sh. R.P. Singh, Advocate
CORAM
Mr.Jagdishwar Kumar Chopra, President
Ms.Mandeep Kaur, Member
ORDER:-
Mr. Jagdishwar Kumar Chopra, President :-Order of this commission will dispose of the present complaint filed by the complainants u/s 34 & 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
Brief facts and pleadings
1. Brief facts of the case are that complainant had obtained one Insu. policy from the opposite parties in his name with respect to his vehicle i.e. Motorcycle Make Hero Splendor Plus bearing Registration No. PB-02-DG-2955 Model 2017 Chassis No. MBLHAR08XHHG04231 bearing policy No. OG-23-3310-1802-00000115 and paid the premium of Rs. 1409/- on 17.1.2023 to the opposite parties, copy of receipt of payment is Ex.C-2 and Ex.C-34, copy of Insu. policy Ex.C-4. It is worth to mention here that after the payment of the said policy/premium amount of Rs. 1409/- the complainant asked for the issuance of the Insu. policy to him but the officials of the opposite parties told him that the policy document will be delivered to him through regd. post . But till date the complainant has neither received the Insu. policy or any of its terms and conditions . The total insured declared value of the said vehicle is Rs. 28043/-. On 19.1.2023 the complainant went to see his cousin brother namely Sukhdev Singh at house No. 241, Karan Vihar, Majitha Road, Amritsar on his said motorcycle. From that house, the said Sukhdev Singh, cousin of the complainant in order to pick his son from the tuition centre which is situated at Gali No. 6, Green Field, Majitha Road, Amritsar took the abovesaid motorcycle of the complainant and parked the said motorcycle at the said place of tuition centre and went inside. After some time when Sukhdev Singh came back after taking his son from the tuition centre, he was surprised and shocked to know that the said motorcycle of the complainant was not there and was stolen. Then he immediately contacted the complainant and told him about the missing of the motorcycle and started searching for the same in the nearby places but all in vain. The complainant then reported the matter with the police i.e. Incharge, Police post Mai Bhago College, P.S.Sadar, Amritsar and on his statement report was registered , copy of the same is Ex.C-6. Accordingly, the complainant lodged claim with the opposite parties regarding theft of his insured vehicle upon which he was asked by the opposite parties for the furnishing of payment schedule about which he told the opposite parties that the payment of Insu. premium was made by him on 17.1.2023 but till date he had not received the policy document. Thus the opposite parties have played another are-twisting method and issued the policy to the complainant in which the period of Insu. is mentioned as 20.1.2023 to 19.1.2024 and this date was manipulated with a malafide intention just to avoid the payment of Insu claim amount to the complainant. Now vide letter dated 5.5.2023 the opposite parties repudiated the claim on the ground that “subject vehicle was stolen on 19.1.2023 whereas the policy inception date is from 20.1.2023 to 19.1.2024 under policy No. OG-23-3310-IB02-00000115,hence the reported loss does not fall under policy purview .”
The aforesaid act of the opposite parties amounts to deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice which has caused lot of mental agony, harassment, inconvenience besides financial loss to the complainant. Vide instant complaint, complainant has sought for the following reliefs:-
(a) Opposite parties be directed to pay claim amount of Rs.28,043/- alongwith interest @ 18% p.a. to the complainant.
(b) Compensation to the tune of Rs. 1,00,000/- may also be awarded to the complainant.
(c ) Opposite party be also directed to Rs. 30000/- as litigation expenses to the complainant.
(d) Any other relief to which the complainant is entitled be also awarded to the complainant.
Hence, this complaint.
2. Upon notice, opposite parties No.1 to 3 appeared and filed written version in which it was submitted that policy No. OG-23-2310-1802-00000115 for the period from 20.1.2023 to 19.1.2024 was issued to the complainant subject to its terms and conditions and exclusions thereon. The complainant has already been informed that the policy inception date is 20.1.2023 while the vehicle of the complainant was allegedly stolen on 19.1.2023, as such the alleged incident does not fall within the purview of the subject Insurance policy. A copy of Insurance policy alongwith terms and conditions is Annexure A (colly), copy of letter dated 14.4.2023 is Annexure B, copy of letter dated 5.5.2023 is Annexure C. It is submitted that on the date of the alleged incident the subject policy did not come into effect, as such there is no deficiency in service in repudiating the claim of the complainant. While denying and controverting other allegations, dismissal of complaint was prayed.
3. The complainant also filed rejoinder to the written version filed by the opposite parties No.1 to 3 and denying the submissions taken by the opposite party in their written version the complainant has prayed for the relief as sought vide instant complaint.
Evidence of the parties and Arguments
4. Alongwith the complaint, complainant has filed his affidavit Ex.C-1, copy of receipt/payment details Ex.C-2 & Ex.C-3, copy of Insu. policy Ex.C-4, copy of police report Ex.C-5 & Ex.C-6 , affidavit of Sh.Sukhdev Singh Ex.C-7, copy of repudiation letter Ex.C-8.
5. On the other hand opposite parties alongwith written version have filed affidavit of Sh. Saurav Khullar Ex.OP/A, copy of Insu. policy alongwith its terms and conditions Annexure A (colly), copy of letter dted 14.4.2023 Annexure B, copy of letter dated 5.5.2023 Annexure C, copies of postal receipts Annexure D & Annexure E.
6. We have heard the Ld.counsel for the parties and have carefully gone through the record on the file . Ld.counsel for the parties stated at bar that they do not want to file written arguments and the contents of the complaint as well as written version alongwith exhibited documents be read as part of written arguments.
Findings
7. From the pleadings of the parties and the evidence produced on record the case of the complainant is that he obtained one Insu. policy from the opposite parties in his name with respect to his vehicle i.e. Motorcycle Make Hero Splendor Plus bearing Registration No. PB-02-DG-2955 Model 2017 Chassis No. MBLHAR08XHHG04231 bearing policy No. OG-23-3310-1802-00000115 and paid the premium of Rs. 1409/- on 17.1.2023 to the opposite parties, copy of receipt of payment is Ex.C-2 and Ex.C-3, copy of policy schedule is Ex.C-4. It is the case of the complainant that till date he has not received the terms and conditions of the policy. The total insured declared value of the said vehicle is Rs. 28043/-. It also stands proved on record that on 19.1.2023 the motorcycle of the complainant bearing Registration No. PB-02-DG-2955 was stolen and in this regard complainant reported the matter with the police i.e. Incharge, Police post Mai Bhago College, P.S.Sadar, Amritsar copy of complaint lodged with the police is Ex.C-5 and on his statement report was registered , copy of the same is Ex.C-6. However, when the complainant lodged claim with the opposite parties regarding theft of his insured vehicle , the opposite parties vide letter dated 5.5.2023 .The only plea taken by the opposite parties while repudiating the claim is that repudiated the claim on the ground that “subject vehicle was stolen on 19.1.2023 whereas the policy inception date is from 20.1.2023 to 19.1.2024 under policy No. OG-23-3310-IB02-00000115.
8. This Commission has given thoughtful consideration to the facts of the present case and before going to the merits of the case perusal of the file particularly the written version as well as affidavit Sh. Saurav Khullar Ex,OP/A supporting the written version shows that only one page affidavit of Sh. Saurav Khullar has been placed on record , as such no evidentiary value can be attached to this affidavit which is not supported the written version. Reliance in this connection has been placed upon Tarlok Singh Vs. Punjab State Electricity Board & Others 2004(1) CLT 127 of the Hon’ble Punjab State Commission, Chandigarh wherein it has been held that allegation mentioned in the complaint not stated in the affidavit and then those not verified to the knowledge of the complainant- Verification held not proper and affidavit cannot be considered to be supporting the complaint.”
9. However for the sake of arguments the only plea taken by the opposite parties is that vehicle in dispute was stolen on 19.1.2023 whereas the policy inception date is from 20.1.2023 to 19.1.2024 under policy No. OG-23-3310-IB02-00000115. But we are not agreed with this plea taken by the opposite parties as the contention of the complainant is that he has made the premium amount of Rs. 1409/- for getting insured the vehicle bearing registration No. PB-02-DG-2955 on 17.1.2023 and the payment details is Ex.C-3 for which the opposite parties have issued receipt Ex.C-2 . Moreover the complainant has also placed on record copy of policy schedule issued by the opposite parties Ex.C-4 in which the policy issued date was shown as 17.1.2023 13:05:40. So once the payment has been made the risk period started from 17.1.2023. The act of the opposite parties in mentioning the policy period from 20.1.2023 to 19.1.2024 whereas in the policy placed on record by the opposite parties itself as Annexure A, policy issued date was written as 17.1.2023 and premium amount of Rs. 1409/- was also deposited in the account of the opposite parties on 17.1.2023 amounts to deficiency in service. In this regard Ld.counsel for the complainant has placed reliance upon Oriental Insurance Co.Ltd. Vs. Dharam Chand 2010(3) CPC 16 of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India wherein it has been held that since the cheque for the premium amount was received by the company at 4.00 a.m. on May 7,1998, the insurance must be deemed to have commenced from that time and four hours later when the vehicle met with the accident, the owner must be deemed to have been covered by the Insurance policy.
10. It is also seen that insurance companies show green pastures to the insured persons at the time of selling the insurance policy and when it comes to payment of the insurance claim, they invent all sort of excuses to deny the claim. In the facts of this case, ratio of the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in case of Dharmendra Goel Vs. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., III (2008) CPJ 63 (SC) is fully attracted, wherein it was held that, Insurance Company being in a dominant position, often acts in an unreasonable manner and after having accepted the value of a particular insured goods, disowns that very figure on one pretext or the other, when they are called upon to pay compensation. This ‘take it or leave it’, attitude is clearly unwarranted not only as being bad in law, but ethically indefensible. It is generally seen that the insurance companies are only interested in earning the premiums and find ways and means to decline claims. In similar set of facts the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in case titled as New India Assurance Company Limited Vs. Smt.Usha Yadav & Others 2008(3) RCR (Civil) Page 111 went on to hold as under:-
“It seems that the insurance companies are only interested in earning the premiums and find ways and means to decline claims. All conditions which generally are hidden, need to be simplified so that these are easily understood by a person at the time of buying any policy.
The Insurance Companies in such cases rely upon clauses of the agreement, which a person is generally made to sign on dotted lines at the time of obtaining policy. Insurance Company also directed to pay costs of Rs.5000/- for luxury litigation, being rich.
11. The above said authorities cover the case of the complainant from all its fours. So the complainant is entitled to reimbursement of the IDV of the vehicle which was duly proved to be stolen i.e. Rs. 28,043/- from the opposite parties.
12. In view of the above discussion, we allow the complaint with costs and the opposite parties are directed to pay the IDV of the stolen vehicle i.e. Rs. 28,043/- alongwith interest @ 7% p.a. from the date of filing of the complaint till its realization to the complainant . So far as compensation is concerned the opposite party indulged the complainant in unwanted litigation which the complainant has filed after hiring Advocate and also faced lot of harassment as well as inconvenience , as such the opposite parties are also directed to pay compensation to the tune of Rs. 10000/- and litigation expenses of Rs.5000/- to the complainant . Compliance of the order be made within 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order ; failing which complainant shall be entitled to get the order executed through the indulgence of this Forum. Copies of the orders be furnished to the parties free of costs. File is ordered to be consigned to the record room. Case could not be disposed of within the stipulated period due to heavy pendency of the cases in this commission.
