DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KANDHAMAL, PHULBANI

                                                                                               C.C NO. 27 OF 2014

Present: Sri Rabindranath Mishra           - President.

               Miss Sudhira Laxmi Pattanaik  - Member.

Bijaya Kumar Sahoo, aged 50 years

S/O: Niranjan Sahoo At: Kendupadar, Phulbani

PO: Phulbani PS: Phulbani Town Dist: kandhamal    ……………..   Complainant.

                      Versus.

Divisional Manager

New India Assurance Co. Ltd.

AT: Giri Road, Hillpatana.

Berhampur Dist: Ganjam.                                             ………….. OPP. Parties.

For the Complainant:   Sri Pratap Chandra Bai, Advocate, Phulbani

For the OPP. Party    :  Sri N.K Patra, Advocate, Phulbani  

Date of Order:  19-10-2015

O R D E R

                                    The case of the Complainant in brief is that he is the owner of an Ambassador car bearing Regd. No. 0R-02-AA- 2553 which was insured as per insurance Policy bearing No. 5506331130100000383 under the New India Assurance Company for the period 20-06-2013 to midnight of 19-06-2014. He has valid driving license bearing no. 1220070000527 issued by R.T.A, Phulbani. On 16-06-2014 at about 3 A.M while the Complainant was returning from Berhampur to Phulbani by driving his own car, the said car dashed against the tree near Sankarakhol under Tikabali PS. As a result of which he sustained multiple injuries on his person and shifted to D.H.H, Phubani for treatment. Subsequently he went to Sparash Hospital Bhubanewar for better treatment. He spent Rs.400,000/- towards medical expenses for operation of his right leg. He was hospitalized from 16-06-2014 to 02-07-2014 for 16 days and thereafter he has taken rest for 4 months as per advice of his doctor. One case was registered vide Tikabali PS case No. 53/2014 dated. 16-06-2014. The Complainant is entitled to get a sum of Rs. 5, 00,000/- for his accidental coverage as per the conditions of the policy .So, he approached the Opposite Party for supply of required papers for claim but on failing to receive the papers from the O.P he has filed this complaint before this Forum and claimed Rs. 500,000/- towards medical expenses, loss of income, pain and suffering, transportation and for feature treatment from the O.P with interest.

                                                                                                                     -2-

                                     The case of the Opposite Party as per his version is that the Complaint is not maintainable in the eye of law as there is no deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party in any point of time . The allegations made by the Complainant in the complaint petition are not all true. The policy of the alleged car does not cover the personal accident of the owner or driver of the vehicles as no premium was paid by the owner for personal accident coverage. The Owner of the car is not a third party to the said accident and the O.P has not received any complaint or claim from the complainant regarding the alleged accident. The O.P does not admit the facts of the complaint petition. The owner driver was charge sheeted by the police under section 279,337,338 I.P.C in G.R case No. 182/2014 on the file of J.M.F.C, G. Udayagiri. Hence, he is not entitled to get any relief as claimed. The O.P has not received any intimation regarding the said accident of the Complainant for which he has violated the conditions of the policy. As there is no cause of action the Complainant is not entitled to get any claim and relief or compensation as claimed by him. He prayed to dismiss the complaint.

                                    In course of hearing the Complainant has filed an affidavit in support of his case. He was examined and cross examined. He has filed some documents which were marked as Exhibit-1 to Exhibit -9. The O.P has also filed some documents in support of his case which were marked as Exhibit- A to   Exhibit-D.

                                    We have gone through the complaint petition, the version filed by the Opposite party, the affidavit and deposition of the complainant and the documents filed by both the parties in support of their case. We have carefully gone through all the exhibits which were marked by both the parties. The sole point for consideration in this case is that whether the Complainant is entitled to get any relief as claimed by him. There is no evidence in the record that the complainant has approached the Opposite party regarding the settlement of his claim after the alleged accident. It is an admitted fact that the Complainant has not filed any claim application before the O.P. Hence, we are not going to scrutinize the evidence of both the parties regarding the claim of the Complainant. When the Complainant has not filed any claim application before the Opposite Party, the question of deficiency in service on the part of the O.P does not arise. This Forum can not direct the O.P to pay any amount towards the medical expenses and compensation in the above circumstances. Hence, the complaint is dismissed being devoid of merit. However the Complainant is at liberty to claim before the O.P as per the conditions of his Insurance policy.

                                    The C.C is disposed of accordingly. Supply free copies of this order to both the parties at an early date.

                                                                                      MEMBER                                      PRESIDENT