BY SRI.R. VIJAYAKUMAR

        The complaint is filed for getting claim amount Rs.16056.15/- along with 12% interest compensation Rs.25,000/- and cost.

          The averments in the complaint can be briefly summarized as follows:

          The Hundai Accent Private car with Reg.No.9099 owned by the complainant  was insured with policy No.14440/05 on 10.3.2005 and remitted premium amount Rs.21379.70/-.  At the time of insuring the car was holding temporary registration.

          On 30.3.2005 the car met with an accident  at Triveni Junction, Kundara a crime was registered with crime No.251/2005.  It was informed by the complainant to the opp.parties.  The vehicle  was inspected and a report was prepared by the inspecting officer.   As per the direction of the opp.parties the complainant has given  the vehicle for repair in the authorized Service  Centre of opp.party  at  Enathu.   The vehicle was repaired and  bill for Rs.16056.15 was remitted  by the complainant.  As per the direction  of Kottarakara Branch Office of opp.parties the complainant submitted the bill and claim form was filed through the letter dated 30.10.2005 .  2^nd opp.party repudiated the claim and the reason stated was the temporary registration not received.  All proceeding for the making the registration was taken by the complainant.   The occurrence of accident was at that time.  The vehicle was insured from 10.3.2005 to 9.3.2006.   Complainant was holding valid license.   The complainant has every right for getting claim and the act of opp.party is illegal.  Hence the complaint is filed for getting compensation.

The opp.party filed version contending, interalia, that the complaint is not maintainable because the complaint is beyond the territorial jurisdiction of this forum.  The 1^st opp.party is situated and functioning at  Thodupuzha and 2^nd  opp.party is functioning  and situated at New Delhi.  The claim of the complainant was preferred  by the 1 opp.party at Thodupuzha.   The entire cause of action for the  present complaint has been  arised at Thodupuzha.   Hence the complaint is liable to  be dismissed.  The complainant has approached the Forum with unclean hand s,.   The insured is supposed to use the vehicle in accordance with statutory provisions of MV Act.   The temporary registration of the vehicle expired on 14.3.2005.   The complainant was using the vehicle violating MV Act.   The complainant has not obtained a permanent Reg.No. or not renewed the temporary registration.   The illegal use of vehicle by the complainant is a willful violation of policy condition.  On getting intimation from the complainant, opp.parties issued claim form, appointed a licensed  surveyor and loss assessor.   The Surveyor on his detailed examination assessed the net liability of the company  to a sum of Rs.10746/- and  in the report he has clearly noted that the vehicle was using without  having a valid registration certificate.   On the basis of the survey report the 1^st opp.party sent a registered letter to the complainant seeking clarification.   The complainant received the letter  but failed to respond for the same.   Opp.party sent 2^nd registered notice on 31.10.2005 repudiating the claim.

          The allegation made in para 6  of the complaint that he has submitted the claim form and produced the  bill before the 1^st opp.party as per  instructions received from the Kottarakkara Branch of  opp.party is absolutely baseless and hence denied.   The complaint is liable to be dismissed. 

          The complainant filed affidavit and Exts.P1 to P6 are marked. 

          The question of maintainability raised by the opp.parties was heard by the Forum.

          As stated in the version of opp.parties the opp.parties were situated and functioning outside  Kollam District.   The vehicle was insured at the opp.party’s office at Thodupuzha, which was outside  the territorial jurisdiction of Consumer Forum, Kollam   There is no cause of action araised within the jurisdiction of the forum.   The repudiation of claim was done by 1^st  opp.party at Thodupuzha.   The 2^nd opp.party is situated and functioning at Delhi.   As there is no opp.party residing or carrying on business  or any branch office related to the allegation? no cause of action arised within the territorial jurisdiction, the Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the case.   The complainant has got opportunity to litigate the matter in the appropriate Forum having territorial jurisdiction to adjudicate the complaint.   For lack of territorial jurisdiction the complaint is not maintainable in the Forum.  Hence the complaint is dismissed.

          Dated this the  30^TH    day of December, 2008

                                                           .

I n d e x

List of witnesses for the complainant : NIL

List of documents for the complainant

P1. – Certificate of Registeration

P2. – Letter sent by Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. To the complainant dt. 29.6.2005

P3. – Certificate cum Policy Schedule

P4. – Invoice

P5. – Delivery receipt

P6. – Letter sent by Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. To the complainant dt..2005