By G. Yadunadhan, President:

            The case of the complainant is that complainant had purchased a Maruthi van bearing No. KL.13F-3933 and the said vehicle was transferred to complainant on 8.12.2003 and requested to transfer the policy belonging to the same vehicle; but it was not done by the opposite party.  Meanwhile the vehicle met with an accident on 27.12.2003.  On the very same day this was intimated to the opposite party.  But opposite party refused to accept the claim due to non-transfer of the policy.  As the policy stands in the name of previous owner, opposite party repudiated the claim.  Therefore complainant is seeking relief against the opposite party to get the repair charges of Rs.47216/-.

            Opposite party entered in appearance and filed version.  Opposite party denies the entire allegation made by the complainant.   Petitioner approached the opposite party only on 30.12.2003 for the transfer of policy.  The policy transferred in the name of applicant on 30.12.2003.  The insurance certificate between the applicant and this opposite party came into existence only on 30.12.2003.  As on the date of accident (27.12.2003) there was no valid insurance policy in the name of the complainant.  The claim of the applicant was repudiated for the reason that there was no valid policy on the date of accident.  The applicant is not entitled to get any relief.  Hence complaint is liable to be dismissed with cost.

            Points for consideration: Whether the complainant is entitled to get any relief?

            Complainant was examined as PW1 and Ext. A1 to A8 were marked on the side of the complainant.  Opposite party has no oral or documentary evidence.

            While perusing Ext. A1, it is clearly evident that the vehicle bearing No. KL-13F-8933 was transferred in the name of complainant on 8.12.2003 and the accident took place on 27.12.2003, whereas insurance policy was transferred only on 30.12.2003.  Opposite party admitted the policy dispute only regarding the transfer of policy.  Time lag between the transfer of policy and accident is only 3 days.  It shows the transfer process was done by the complainant before the accident.  The only question to be considered is that whether opposite party is liable to pay any amount to the complainant.  Opposite party cannot absolve from the liability to pay the amount to the complainant.  In Narayanasing Vs. New India Assurance Co. Ltd., 2007 CPJ (NC) held that GIC issued a circular on 1994 with regard to the transfer of the vehicle and the transfer of the insurance benefit automatically in favour of the transferee.  The said regulation is a part of the Indian Motor Tariff Regulation.  As per said regulation, on transfer of the vehicle the benefit under the policy in force will automatically accrued to the new owner, policy would continue until expiry of the policy.  The above case discussed in detail that insurance companies are suppressing the regulations and take undue advantage and contended with all force that as the insurance policy was not transferred in favour  of the new purchaser, insurance companies are not liable to reimburse insures because transferees are not having any insurable interest.  Opposite party cannot simply reject the complainant’s claim taking this defence that non-transfer of policy in the name of R.C. owner.  Here Ext. A7 shows value assessed by the Surveyor is Rs.29,000/-.  No contra evidence produced by the complainant regarding the actual loss or not taken any steps to convince the Forum about the actual loss.

            Under these circumstances, petition is allowed and the opposite party is directed to pay an amount of Rs.29,000/- (Rupees twenty nine thousand only) and also to pay a compensation of Rs.3000/- Rupees three thousand only) to the complainant without any cost.  Comply the order within one month on receipt of the copy of this order.

            Pronounced in open Court this the 22^nd day of July 2009.

                        Sd/-President                                              Sd/- Member

APPENDIX

Documents exhibited for the complainant:

A1        Photocopy of the R.C.

A2        Private Car Package Policy.

A3        Copy of the Certificate of Insurance of private car.

A4            Photocopy of letter No. 101601/Motor OD claims/2004 dated 13.5.2004.

A5            Photocopy of lawyer notice dated 10.6.04.

A6        Postal acknowledgement card.

A7        Reply to Ext. A5 lawyer notice.

A8        Copy of FIR.

Documents exhibited for the opposite party:

Nil.

Witness examined for the complainant:

PW1     Bushra, D/o. Koyakutty, Nest Koolyppoyil, Nanminda.

Witness examined for the opposite party:

None.

-/True copy/-

Sd/-President

(Forwarded/by Order)

Senior Superintendent.