Haryana

Ambala

CC/22/2018

Daljit Rai - Complainant(s)

Versus

Branch Manager Iffco Tokio General Inss. - Opp.Party(s)

01 Mar 2019

ORDER

 

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, AMBALA

 

 

                                                                      Complaint case no.        : 22of 2018

                                                          Date of Institution         : 12.01.2018

                                                          Date of decision    : 01.03.2019

 

 

Daljit Rai s/o late Sh. Chajju Ram r/o Village & PO Danipur, Tehsil & District Ambala.

……. Complainant.

 

 

1.  Branch Manager, IFFCO Tokio General  Insurance Company Ltd. 6330, 2^nd Floor, above Dena Bank, Punjabi Mohalla, Ambala Cantt, District Ambala-133003

2.  The Manager, IFFCO Tokio General Insurance Company Ltd. Plot No.28 B & C, Sector 28A, Madhya Marg, Chandigarh-160002.

3.  The General Manager, IFFCO Tokio General Insurance Co. Ltd. IFFCO Sadan, C-1, District Centre, Saket, New Delhi-110017.

 

 ….…. Opposite Parties.

 

Before:        Ms. Neena Sandhu,  President.

                   Ms. Ruby Sharma, Member,

Sh. Vinod Kumar Sharma, Member.

                  

                            

Present:       Ms. Charanjeet Kaur, counsel for complainant.

Sh. R.K.Vig, counsel for Ops.

 

Order:         Smt. Neena Sandhu, President.

Complainant has filed this compliant under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) against the Opposite Party(hereinafter referred to as ‘Op’) praying for issuance of  following reliefs:-

1. To pay Rs. 403330/- alongwith  interest  18% per annum from the date of damage of the car  till realization. 
2. To pay of Rs. 20000/- as compensation on account of mental agony and physical harassment suffered by him alongwith litigations expenses or any other relief which this Hon’ble Forum deems fit.

 

In nutshell, brief facts of the present complaint are that the complainant is the registered owner of the Car having registration No.HR01AB-0810 make Indigo. The complainant got it insured with   OP No.2 vide insurance policy bearing no.1385X0EBP400 for the period from 01.09.2015 to 31.08.2016.On 26.11.2015, the said car met with an accident when the brother of the complainant namely Sh. Dharamveer was driving it while coming from Ambala to Ismailabad. An FIR bearing no. 0189 dated 27.11.2015 was lodged in the Police Station, Sadar Ambala. The brother of the complainant received seriously injuries and died on 08.12.2015. Due to the sudden death of the brother of the complainant, all the family members remained under depression and the complainant preferred the claim vide reference no.1-7CPMRNU dated 22.08.2016 with Ops for the total damageof the car. It is further stated that before lodging the claim with the Ops, the complainant got assessed the loss from the surveyor, Vikas Kohli, at Vishwakarma Motor Shivaji Park, Opp. Sector-9, Ambala City. The said surveyor after checking the damaged car, assessed the loss of Rs.4,03,330/- and the copy of the said surveyor report was submitted with the Ops alongwith the claim form.  But when the Ops did not settle his claim then  the complainant served a registered AD,  legal notice dated 03.08.2017 upon the  Ops but all in vain. Due to non settlement of the claim by the OPs, the complainant has suffered a lot of mental agony and physical harassment.  Hence, the present complaint.

2.                 Upon notice, Ops appeared through counsel and tendered separate written version raising preliminary objections that  complaint is not maintainable. On merits, it is stated that the FIR No.0189 dated 27.11.2015 U/s 279/337/427 IPC was registered in Police Station Sadar Ambala on the complaint of one Sh. Dharamvir Singh son of Sh. Chhajju Ram regarding the accident, which had taken place on 26.11.2015 of Car having registration No.HR-01AB-0810 with School Bus having registration No.HR-37-C-5980 resulting into the death of the brother of complainant.  The information regarding the accident, which took place on 26.11.2015 was given to the insurance company while lodging claim on 20.08.2016 i.e. after a lapse of nearly nine months. According to terms and conditions of the policy, information  was required to be given immediately and there is no justification  was explain  huge delay of nearly 268 days i.e.9 months  i.e. from 27.11.2015 to 20.08.2016. It is the admitted case of complainant that he failed to inform the insurance company on account of depression caused due to the death of his brother, Dharamvir who was driving the car at the time of accident i.e. on 26.11.2015. During this period of 9 months, any member of the family could have to lodge the claim with insurance company at the earliest possible time in accordance with condition no.1 & 8 of the policy, Due to delay in intimation in lodging the claim the insurance company has rightly repudiated the claim and information regarding the same was given to the complainant vide speed post letter dated 21.04.2017. As such, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the Ops and prayer has been made  for dismissal of the  present complaint.

3.                To prove his version complainant tendered affidavit as Annexure C-X along with documents as Annexure C-1and C-7 and close his evidence. On the other hand, counsel for the Ops has tendered affidavit as Annexure R-A along with documents as Annexure R-1 and R-6 and close their evidence.

4.                We have heard learned counsel for both the parties and carefully gone through the case file.

5.                From the perusal of the  copy of insurance policy Annexure C-3 it is evident that the complainant got his car having registration No.No.HR01AB-0810 insured with the Ops for the period from 01.09.2015 to 31.08.2016 for an IDV of Rs. 2,75,000/-. From the FIR dated 27.11.2015 Annexure C-2/R-3, it is apparent that the said car met with an accident on 26.11.2015. The learned counsel for the complainant has argued that the due the accident of the above said car, the brother of complainant received serious injuries and succumbed to death on 08.12.2015. The deceased brother of the complainant was the head of the family and was managing family affairs. Due to his sudden death, all the family members remained under depression for quite a long time and as such there was delay in intimating the insurance company, which was not intentional but due to adverse circumstances. He further argued that in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme in the case of Om Prakash Vs. Reliance General Insurance and Anr., IV(2017) CPJ10(SC), wherein it has been held that delay in informing the insurance company would not debar the insured from getting the insurance claim. By repudiating the genuine claim of the complainant, the Ops have committed in deficiency in service. On the other hand the learned counsel for the OP No.1 has referred to the case of Gurshinder Singh Vs. Sriram General Insurance Co. Ltd & Anr. Decided by the Hon’ble Supreme Court on 09.01.2018 wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India looking into the conflicting view expressed by the two benches of equal strength in the case of Om Prakash Vs. Reliance General Insurance and Anr.(supra) and Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Parvesh Chander Chadha (Civil Appeal  No. 6739 of 2010) decided on  17^th August 2010, has observed that the matter requires to be heard by the  three learned judges. The matter was placed before the Chief Justice of India, for constitution of three judges bench to resolve the conflict. Keeping in view the above referred judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and two conflicting judgments, of two benches of Hon’ble Supreme Court and matter having been referred to three members bench, on the point of the delay in intimation having not finally been settled, we deem it fit that the judgment which is favourable to the consumer and latest in time should be followed as the Consumer Protection Act is a benevolent Act. Even otherwise, the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority (IRDA) in September 2011 issued instructions to all the insurance companies that the current contractual obligation imposing the condition that the claims shall be intimated to the insurer with prescribed documents within specified number of days is necessary for insurers for effecting various post claim activities like investigation, loss assessment, provisioning, claim settlement etc.  However, this condition should not prevent settlement of genuine claims, particularly when there is delay in intimating or in submission of documents due to unavoidable circumstances.  In view the principle of law settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Om Prakash Vs. Reliance General Insurance & Anr.(supra) and the instructions of IRDA, it would not be fair and reasonable  on the part of the Ops to reject the claim of the complainant.  From the policy document it is evident that the car in question was insured for an IDV of  Rs.2,75,000/-, therefore, the Ops are liable to pay the said amount to the complainant minus salvage value of the car in question alongwith interest. The Ops are also liable to compensate the complainant for the mental agony and physical harassment suffered by him alongwith litigation expenses.

In view of the aforesaid discussion we hereby allow the present complaint and direct the Ops in following manner:-

1. To pay Rs. 2,75,000/- to the complainant minus salvage value alongwith interest @ 7% per annum w.e.f. 21.04.2017 i.e. the date of repudiation of the claim till its realization .

 

2. To pay Rs. 5000/- as compensation.

 

3. To pay Rs. 3000/- as  litigation expenses.

 

 

The Ops are further directed to comply with the aforesaid directions within the period of  30 days  from the date of receipt of the  certified copy of this order, failing which the awarded amount (-litigation cost) shall carry interest @ 9% per annum for the period of default. Copy of the order be sent to the parties concerned as per rules free of costs. File be indexed and consigned to the record room.

Announced on : 01.03.2019

 

 

 

          (Vinod Kumar Sharma)   (Ruby Sharma)   (Neena Sandhu)

                Member                                   Member                       President