IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ALAPPUZHA
Monday the 8th day of March, 2010
Filed on 06.08.07
Present
- Sri. Jimmy Korah (President)
- Sri. K. Anirudhan (Member)
- Smt. Shajitha Beevi (Member)
in
C.C.No.159/07
between
Complainant:- Opposite Party:-
Smt. Bindu, United India Insurance Company Ltd,
W/o deceased M.R.Prakashan, Represented by its Divisional Manager,
Melappalli House, Muhamma .P.O, Divisional Office,
Muhamma Panchayath, Ward-9, Sarada shopping Complex,
Alappuzha District, Mullackal,
Kerala State. Alappuzha-688 011
(By Adv.James Chacko) (By Adv.C.Muraleedharan)
O R D E R
SRI.JIMMY KORAH (PRESIDENT)
Complainant is the legal heir and nominee of Mr. M.R.Prakasan who died on 7th January 2006 while he was riding his motor cycle. On the fateful day, consequent to a hit by a Santro Car, the deceased was hurled down on the road, and died on his way to the hospital. At the time of the said accident, the motor cycle which he was riding was holding a valid insurance policy bearing No.101502/31/05/02437 availed from the opposite party. At the time of availing the said policy, the deceased had taken another personal accident insurance policy namely 'Swanthana Insurance Policy' bearing No.191502/48/05/00569 from the very same opposite party. At the material time of accident, both the policies were in force. Also the deceased was holding a valid license. Subsequently, the complainant lodged an accident benefit claim and compensation with the opposite party, but on causing the complainant waiting hopefully, the same was repudiated on unsubstantiated grounds. Resultantly, the complainant caused to send a lawyer notice in vain. Aggrieved by this, the instant complaint has been filed praying for the insurance amount and compensation.
1. On issuing notice, the opposite party appeared and filed version. According to the opposite party, at the time of accident, the deceased insurer was having no valid license. The license had expired as early as on 15th August 2004. The opposite party is not liable to pay any amount for the deceased violated the terms and condition of the policy. As such the repudiation of the policy was lawful, the opposite party asserts. The amount claimed by the complainant is also is much beyond the insured sum. The opposite party contends that viewing from any angle, the complaint is absolutely unsustainable and is only to be dismissed.
2. On the complainant's side, the complainant was examined as PW1 and Exbts Al to A9 were marked. On the side of the opposite party filed a proof affidavit and produced the documents Exbts. Bl to B6 marked.
3. Now the questions come up before us for consideration are:-
(a) Whether the petitioners are entitled to the accident benefit claim?
(b) Or whether the deceased was holding valid license at the time of the material accident?
4. It is not in dispute that the deceased was holding an insurance from the opposite party at the time his death took place or the death was due to a collision of the deceased's vehicle with another. The opposite party's forceful contention is that the claim for the assured amount and compensation was repudiated on the ground that the deceased was not having a valid license that allow him to ride the Motor cycle. According to the opposite party, the driving license of the deceased had expired beyond 2 years prior to the material accident. The said aspect being so, the deceased out rightly violated the consequential condition of the policy. In this context, the opposite party is not liable to honor the claim of the complainant, the opposite party submits. We perused the materials available on record. A plain perusal of the copy of the driving license produced by both the parties would go to show that the driving license of the deceased is valid only up to a 15th August 2004. The same is apparently stated in page No.10 of the driving license. At the same time it is noteworthy that the complainant too has no case that even if the deceased was not holding a valid driving license, the complainant is entitled to the claim amount. In this back drop, this Forum has no other option to open but to accept the contentions of the opposite party.
In view of the considerations and finding herein above, the complaint is dismissed. The parties are left to bear with their own costs.
Pronounced in open Forum on this the 8th day of March, 2010.
Sd/-Sri. Jimmy Korah
Sd/-Sri. K. Anirudhan
Sd/-Smt. N. Shajitha Beevi
Appendix:-
Evidence of the complainant:-
PW1 - Bindu (Witness)
Ext. A1 - The Copy of the policy certificate issued by United India Insurance Co.Ltd.
Ext. A2 - The Copy of the Insurance policy certificate issued by United India Insurance
Co.Ltd
Ext. A3 - The Copy of the Legal Notice and original Postal Receipt and acknowledgment
Ext. A4 - The reply notices from United India Insurance Co.Ltd.05/09/07 and 15/01/08
Ext. A5 - The Copy of the FIR and FIS
Ext. A6 - The copy of the Legal Relationship Certificate
Ext. A7 - The copy of the Post-Mortem Certificate
Ext. A8 - The copy of the Driving Licence
Ext. A9 - The copy of the Circular no.C1-16757/TC/93 dated, 21/02/1998
Evidence of the opposite party:-
Proof affidavit in lieu of position
Ext. B1 - The copy of the Personal Accident Insurance-Claimant’s Statement
Ext. B2 - The copy of the Driving Licence of deceased M.R.Prakasan
Ext. B3 - The copy of the Repudiation Certificate dated, 5/9/07
Ext. B4 - The copy of the Personal Accident Policy (Individual)
Ext. B5 - The copy of the Santhwana Insurance Policy
Ext. B6 - The copy of the (duplicate) Package Policy/Brochure on behalf of
M.R.Prakasan
// True Copy //
By Order
Senior Superintendent
To
Complainant/Opposite Parties/S.F.
Typed by:- k.x/-
Compared by:-
