ORDER

12.06.2024

Sh. Sanjay Kumar, President

1. Brief facts of the present case are that on 12.9.2011 the complainant had purchased a Tata Nano Car (CX) from Tata Motors, Delhi. It is stated that car registration no. of the said vehicle is DL 08 CM 8821, chasis no.D27825 and Engine no.K28033.  It is further stated that the respondent no.1 is an insurance company having branch office at the aforesaid address and under control and supervision of the respondent no.2 at the address given above.
2. It is stated that the complainant had got the insurance of the said car from respondent no.1 vide policy no.FPV/I1011500/12/09/D1124P and account no.12000256 and at that time respondent no.1 assured the complainant that in case of any claim, there are 1800 garages across all over India where the complainant can avail quick repair facility of the vehicle without any undue delay and without spent any money from his pocket and on this assurance, the complainant had taken comprehensive insurance policy from respondent no.1 for his car no. DL 08 CM 8821. It is further stated that period of the policy pertaining to the said car starts from 1109.2011 to 10.09.2013. It is stated that on 19.06.2013 at about 7.30 pm in the evening time, the said car became out of order and could not start inspite of best efforts made by the complainant hence the ctd parked the said car on the road side safely.
3. It  is stated that on the next day i.e 20.6.2013 at about 12 am in the noon the complainant reached at the spot and found the said car in the damaged condition due to hit by some unknown vehicle in the night. It is further stated that thereafter on 20.6.2013 the said car was inspected and an estimation report for repair was prepared by the concerned surveyor officer of Tata Motor Narain Singh & Sons, D-34 SMA, Industrial Estate, Opp, Jahangir Puri G.T Karnal Road Delhi 33. It is stated that the said surveyor told to the complainant that respondents/insurance co. is liable  to pay estimated cost of Rs.1,78,838/- for the repair of the said vehicle in question as per estimation report dated 21.06.2013. It is stated that thereafter on 25.06.2013 respondent no.1 had issued the claim form no.F0269829 dated 25.06.2013 in respect of the said car for repair with the assurance that the claim of the said vehicle would be sanctioned with in a week and the complainant would be also able to get his vehicle fully repaired within 15/20 days as the vehicle is under comprehensive insurance policy.
4. It is stated that on 28.06.2013 the complainant made an enquiry in respect of his claim and the complainant was informed and insured by respondent no.1 concerned officer that there is no need of worry as the respondent no.1 claim would be sanctioned within next 2/3 days from the head office. It is further stated that on 10.7.2013 the complainant contacted to respondent no.1 and complainant was asked to pay Rs.20,000/- as bribe and upon this complainant asked respondent no.1 officials that when his vehicle is fully insured under comprehensive policy then on which basis respondent no.1 are not accepting the claim of complainant’s car and demanding the bribe. At this respondent no.1 official became rude and told that we have 100 of reasons to decline the claim out of which one is that complainant parked the said car on the road side, on this, the complainant clarified the reason to stand the car on road side and official of respondent no.1 refused to sanction the said claim of the car in question without any plausible and tangible reason in this regard. It is stated that besides the respondents are liable to pay an amount of Rs.3,000/- for crane charges to pick up the said vehicle from incident place to Tata Motors besides the other liabilities in this regard.
5. The complainant is seeking direction to OP to pay sum of Rs.2,50,138/- to complainant as insurance claim of Rs.1,78,838/-, compensation Rs.50,000/-, crane charges Rs.3000/-, Rs.18,300/- from 21.06.2013 to 20.08.2013 @ Rs.300/- per day and thereafter till the final disposal of the case and the complainant was also deprived to use the said car due to respondents negligency in this regard.
6. OP1 and 2 filed detailed WS. It is admitted that private carbearing registration no. DL 08 CM 8821 was insured with OP for 11.09.2012 to 10.09.2013 under the policy FPV/i1011500/12/09/D1124P. It is stated that the cashless services to the extent of assessed net amount is available at selected repairs and only in cases where the terms and condtions of the insurance have been complied with the complainant and the claim is found admissible. It is further stated that complainant alleged that a crime havingbeen committed by some unidentified party,yet it appears from the version of complainant and the documents annexed to the complaint that police had recorded a DD entry and not an FIR. It is stated that complainant has filed no police final report.
7. It is stated that OP deputed a government licensed surveyor for inspection and assessment of loss and it was found by the surveyor that the complainants version is that the vehicle had a breakdown and become out of order at around 7.30 pm on 19.06.2013 and the complainant had left it on the road unattended. It is further stated that the vehicle was so lying there over night and on the next date at 12 noon he found it damaged. It is stated that apparently the complainant had left the vehicle parked in unsafe condition on the road for which reason it might have been hit by some passing vehicle and it is an act of gross carelessness. It is stated that complainant has not taken reasonable care to protect the vehicle from the loss of damages and committed breach of policy condition.
8. It is stated that admissibility of a claim depends upon the compliance by the claimant with the terms and conditions of the policy and in the present case complainant has committed breach of conditions and is not entitled to claim. It is stated that an admissible claim the cost of protection and removal of vehicle to the nearest repair and redelivery to the insured is limited to Rs.15000/- as per provision in the policy. It is stated that the repudiation of the claim is legal and justified. The OP1 and 2 denied all the allegations made in the complaint. It is stated that complaint is liable to be dismissed.
9. Complainant filed rejoinder to the WS of OP1 and 2 and denied all the allegations made therein and reiterated contents of complaint.
10. Complainant filed evidence by way of his affidavit and reiterated contents of complaint. Complainant relied on copy of insurance Ex.CW1/1, copy of complaint Ex.CW1/2, copy of estimation report Ex.CW1/3, copy of claim form no. F0269828 dated 25.06.2013 Ex.CW1/4 and copy of legal notice, postal receipt and postal A/D are Ex.CW1/5, 6 and 7.
11. OP1 and 2 filed evidence by way of affidavit of Shivali Sharma Sr. Executive Legal claims and reiterated contents of WS. OP relied on copy of insurance policy with terms and  conditions Annexure R-1, copy of DD entry of police Annexure R-2, copy of survey report dated 12.2.2014 Annexure R-3 and copy of OP letter dated 4.3.2014 Annexure R-4.
12. Written arguments filed by complainant, OP1 and OP2.
13. The parties and their counsel despite given ample opportunities failed to address the arguments. We have gone through the written arguments filed by the parties and perused the record.
14. It is admitted case of parties that complainant is the registered owner of vehicle no. DL 08 CM 8821 and got the insurance policy from OP for the period 11.09.2011 to 10.09.2013. It is admitted by complainant that on 19.06.2013 at about 7.30 pm in the evening his car became out of order and he parked on the roadside safely and on next day i.e 20.06.2013 at about 12 pm in the noon when complainant reached and found the car in a damaged condition. The complainant lodged a complaint with police station Bhalaswa vide DD no.40B dated 20.06.2013. The complainant got inspected the car and got the estimation report for repair from surveyor officer of Tata Motor Narain Singh & Sons, GT Karnal Road, New Delhi. The complainant filed claim on 25.06.2013 having no. F0269828 with OP insurance company.
15. The OP taken the stand that a government licensed surveyor appointed for inspection and assessment of loss who found that the vehicle had breakdown and become out of order at around 7.30 pm on 19.06.2013 and complainant left on the road unattended. According to OP the complainant left the vehicle parked in unsafe condition on the road which is the reason it might have been hit by some passing vehicle and it is an act of gross carelessness and committed breach of condition of  the policy which imposes duty on insured to take all reasonable steps to safeguard the vehicle from loss or damage. The complainant also violated the condition 8 of the terms and condition of  the policy. The OP has proved the survey report dated 12.02.2014 and assessment report of loss of Rs.1,03,649.63. The OP further proved the repudiation letter dated 04.03.2014. The complainant taken the ground that on 10.07.2013 when contacted OP1 than bribe of Rs.20,000/- was demanded. However, complainant has not specifically named the official and no complaint made to the higher officials in this regard. The  complainant also not filed photographs of the site where the  vehicle was damaged to establish that he has taken all the due care and parked the vehicle at a safe place. The damage of the vehicle clearly established that complainant did not take reasonable steps to safeguard the vehicle when parked and left unattended without proper precautions. The OP has established on record that there is no deficiency of service and complainant committed breach of terms and conditions of the insurance policy. Hence, the repudiation letter dated 04.03.2014 is just, fair and legal.
16. On the basis of above observation and discussion present complaint is dismissed. No order as to  cost. File be consigned to record room.
17. Copy of the order be given to the parties free of cost as per order dated 04.04.2022 of Hon’ble State Commission after receiving an application from the parties in the registry. The orders be uploaded on www.confonet.nic.in.

Announced in open Commission on  12.06.2024.

     SANJAY KUMAR                 NIPUR CHANDNA                       RAJESH

       PRESIDENT                             MEMBER                                MEMBER