Date of filing : 31-12-2010
Date of order : 05-08-2011
IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KASARAGOD
CC. 278/2010
Dated this, the 5th day of August 2011
PRESENT
SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ : PRESIDENT
SMT.P.RAMADEVI : MEMBER
SMT.K.G.BEENA : MEMBER
Abdul Azeez.P.B, } Complainant
S/o.Mariyamma, Vodangala House,
Meenja, Kodalamogaru.Po,
Manjeshwaram, Kasaragod
Rep. By his Power of Attorney Holder
Mohammed Ashraf, S/o. Mariyamma,
R/at. 7/428, Vodangala House, Meenja,
Kodalamogaru.Po,
Manjeshwaram, Kasaragod.
(Adv.K.Vinodkumar, Kasaragod)
The Branch Manager, } Opposite party
National Insurance Co.Ltd,
Branch office, M.G.Road, Kasaragod
(Adv. M.Balagopalan, Kasaragod)
O R D E R
SMT.K.G.BEENA, MEMBER
The crux of the complaint is that the complainant is the registered owner of the Motor bike bearing Reg.No.KL-14H-5667 and the same is insured with the opposite party vide policy No.571101/31/09;/6200002437. The said vehicle is damaged in a road accident on 03-04-2010 at Miyapadavu. Mr.Ashraf Ali who is having a valid driving licence, was riding the bike at the time of accident. The complainant has informed the accident to opposite party and filed a claim before the opposite party for the damages caused to the vehicle. Complainant has submitted a bill for `18,419/- as repair charges. Opposite party is liable to pay the same to the complainant as per the terms of the policy. But opposite party has not settled the claim of the complainant so far. Hence the complaint for necessary redressal.
2. According to opposite party, the motor cycle bearing Reg.No.KL 14H-5667 met with an accident on 3-4-10 but the accident was intimated to the opposite party only on 8-4-2010. As per the terms and conditions of policy the fact of accident has to be intimated to the company as soon as it occurred. On intimation, opposite party deputed a surveyor to assess the damages caused to the vehicle. Surveyor assessed the damages to the tune of `11,899/-. Opposite party deputed an investigator to conduct an investigation about the incident. In the investigation it is revealed that no First Information Report is lodged before the Police. The Power of Attorney Holder, Muhammad Ashraf was riding the motor cycle at the time of accident. He has sustained injuries and was treated at Father Mullers Hospital, Mangalore. The fact of accident was not reported by him anywhere. The investigator has recorded the signed statement of Power of Attorney Holder to the effect that he has driven the vehicle at the time of accident and Ashraf Ali was not riding the vehicle at the time of accident. The opposite party believes that the claim is filed by the power of attorney holder in collusion with Ashraf in order to dupe and defraud the company. Opposite party repudiated the claim on the basis of the report of investigator.
3. Complainant filed affidavit in lieu of chief examination. Exts A1 to A6 marked. Complainant faced cross-examination by the counsel of opposite party. Exts B1 to B5 marked.
4. Considering the facts and evidence before the Forum, the following issues are raised for consideration.
1. Whether there is deficiency of service on the part of opposite party?
2. If so, what order as to relief and cost?
For convenience issues No.1&2 can be discussed together.
5. Evidence in this case consists of the evidence of PW1, the power of attorney holder of the complainant, the statement given by PW1 to Investigator, and the documents filed by both sides.
6. Ext.B2 is the statement given by the power of attorney holder to the investigator. Ext.B2 clearly says that the motor cycle was driven by the power of attorney holder of the complainant Muhammed Ashraf, and he has no driving licence at the time of accident. Hence licence of Ashraf Ali has been attached to the claim form in order to dupe and defraud the company. The accident occurred on 3-4-2010. But the claim Form has been submitted before the opposite party on 8-4-2010, after 5 days of accident. Opposite party appointed a surveyor for assessing the damages caused to the motor cycle on 16-4-2010. Survey conducted on that day itself. Eventhough Muhammed Ashraf sustained injuries in the accident on 3-4-2010, and was treated at Father Muller’s Hospital Mangalore. No FIR is lodged regarding the accident and there is 5 days delay in intimating the accident to opposite party. This has to be read together with no police intimation eventhough the accident resulted minor injuries to PW1. In this situation the statement given by PW1 to investigator can be relied that Muhammed Ashraf who is the power of attorney holder of the complainant was riding the motor cycle at the time of accident. As he does not have valid driving licence at that time, proper steps were not taken immediately after the accident and cause of injury was not revealed to the doctor. In order to counter the statement lodged by PW1 before the investigator the complainant made a feeble attempt producing Ext.A6 the attested copy of SSLC of PW1 to show that his regional language is Kannada and the statement recorded by the Investigator is in Malayalam. But that is not a conclusive proof that the complainant does not know Malayalam especially when there are mixed students of both languages in almost all schools of Kasaragod.
Hence we are of the view that this complainant is not entitled for any relief as prayed in the complaint. Hence the complaint is dismissed with no order as to cost.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Exts.
A1. Copy RC of the vehicle.
A2. Copy of driving licence of Ashraf Ali,
A3. Copy of the invoice.
A4. 09-07-2010 copy of lawyer notice.
A5. Postal acknowledgement card
A6. Photocopy of S.S.L.C. Book of Mohammed Ashraf.
B1. Motor Claim Form
B2. Statement of Mohammed Ashraf.
B3. Motor Claim Intimation Form
B4. 2-6-10 Motor Final Survey Report.
B5.02-06-2010 Re inspection Report.
PW1. Mohammed Ashraf.M.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Pj/ Forwarded by Order
SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT
