Haryana

Karnal

239/2014

Anwar S/o Asgar Ali - Complainant(s)

Versus

Future Generali India Insurance Company Limited - Opp.Party(s)

R.K. Verma

06 Oct 2016

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM KARNAL.

                                                              Complaint No. 239 of 2014

                                                             Date of instt. 27.09.2014

                                                               Date of decision:6.10.2016

 

Anwar son of Shri Asgar Ali resident of village Manglore, tehsil and District Karnal.

 

                                                                         ……..Complainant.

                                                Versus

1. Future Generali India Insurance Company Limited, Main market, Sector-9, U.E. Karnal, through its Branch Manager (Insurer of the Tractor bearing no.HR-05AL-3172.)

2. Future Generali India Insurance Company Limited, 4^th floor, SJ Tower, Plot no.4693, opposite Community Center, Tosham road, Dabra Chowk, Sector-13P, Hisar, through its Manager (Insurer of the Tractor bearing no.HR-05AL-3172)

3. Supreme Securities Ltd., office at Backside of Bus Stand, Karnal through its Branch Manager (Financer of the Tractor bearing no.HR-05AL-3172).

 

                                                                               ……Opposite Parties.

                     Complaint u/s 12  of the Consumer Protection Act.

 

Before                   Sh.K.C.Sharma……….President.

                   Sh.Anil Sharma…….Member.

 

Present:-      Shri R.K. Verma Advocate for complainant.

                    Shri Rohit Gupta Advocate for opposite parties no.1 & 2.

                     Shri Amish Goyal Advocate for opposite party no.3

                                     

 ORDER:

 

                        This complaint has been filed by the complainant u/s 12 of the Consumer protection Act, 1986, on the averments that on 19.08.2013 he purchased tractor Eicher 333 H.P. 2365 CC bearing chasis no.920914123052 and engine no.D-46598 from M/s V.K. Traders, Namestety Chowk, Karnal, the authorized dealer, who issued temporary registration no.HR99 PST 1956. The said tractor was financed by opposite party no.3, who took the responsibility of getting the vehicle insured and registered in his name and obtained all the charges and necessary documents from him. The tractor was got insured from opposite parties no.1 and 2 under the Package Policy for the period of 19.08.2013 to 18.08.2014, vide cover note no.F5023702. On 13.0.4.2014 he was coming from village Manglora to Karnal on his tractor, which was being driven by Shri Adresh son of Asgar resident of Manglora on his due left side of the road. The driver parked the tractor on left side of the road for urinary, but suddenly a truck came from the opposite side and hit the front side of the tractor due to which the tractor was badly damaged. He informed about the accident immediately to opposite party no.1 and shifted the tractor to the workshop for repairing. An amount of Rs.47,260/- besides the other labour charges was paid by him for repair of the tractor. Thereafter, he lodged claim with opposite parties no.1 and 2, but his claim was repudiated, vide letter dated 26.07.2014 on the ground that registration of the vehicle was not valid at the time of loss, as the vehicle met with an accident on 13.04.2014 and the registration certificate was valid from 14.05.2014. Such act and conduct on the part of the opposite parties amounted to deficiency in service, due to which he suffered mental pain, agony and harassment apart from financial loss.

2.                Notice of the complaint was given to the opposite parties. The opposite parties no.1 and 2 filed written statement controverting the claim of the complainant. Objections have been raised that this forum has no territorial jurisdiction to entertain and decide the present complaint; that the complainant has no cause of action to file the complaint; that there was no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties and that complicated questions of law and facts are involved, which cannot be decided by this Forum under summary jurisdiction.

                   On merits, it has been submitted that Eicher Tractor Model 333 bearing Engine no.D-46598 and Chasis no.920914123052 was insured by opposite party no.1 in the name of the complainant, vide cover note no.F5023702 and policy no.M0163411 for the period of 19.08.2013 to 18.08.2014 under Farmer’s Package Insurance. The tractor met with an accident on 13.04.2014, as intimated by the complainant and the same was got repaired from the work shop. The opposite parties no.1 and 2, vide letter dated 18.4.2014 and reminder dated 28.4.2014 demanded certain documents, which were required for processing of claim, but the complainant failed to produce the same. Even the surveyor was not provided the Registration Certificate of the vehicle. Lateron, the registration certificate was provided by the complainant which, was valid from 14.5.2014. It was observed that the vehicle was not got registered with the concerned Registering Authority at the time of loss and the same was being plied on the road without valid Registration Certificate, therefore, the claim was repudiated, vide letter dated 26.07.2014. The other allegations made in the complaint have been denied.

3.                Opposite party no.3 also filed written statement-cum-affidavit of Anil Kumar disputing the claim of the complainant. Objections have been raised that the complainant has not approached this forum with clean hands; that the complaint is not maintainable in the present form; that the complainant has no locus standi and cause of action to file the complaint and that the complaint is bad for mis-joinder and non-joinder of necessary parties.

                   On merits, it has been denied that the opposite party no.3 received the alleged charges from the complainant for getting insured his tractor from opposite parties no.1 and 2 and also received necessary documents for registration of the tractor in the office of concerned RTA. The opposite party no.3 is finance company and providing finance and it does not deal in insurance or other registration work of the vehicle. The complainant has put false and frivolous story. It was the duty of the complainant to get registered his vehicle. There was no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party no.3. The other allegations made in the complaint have specifically been denied.

4.                In evidence of the complainant, his affidavit Ex. C1 and documents Ex.C2 to C6 have been tendered.

5.                On the other hand, in evidence of the opposite parties, affidavit of Sandeep Kapoor Senior Legal Executive Ex.O1/A, affidavit of Anil Kumar Ex.RW3/A and documents Ex. O1 to Ex.O7 have been tendered.

6.                We have appraised the evidence on record, the material circumstances of the case and the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties.

7.                The complainant had purchased one Eicher Tractor on 19.8.2013 from M/s V.K.Traders the authorized dealer, after availing financial facility from opposite party no.3. The authorized dealer had issued temporary registration no.HR99 PST 1956. The said tractor was got insured from opposite parties no.1 and 2 for the period of 19.08.2013 to 18.8.2014. However, before getting the tractor registered from Registering Authority the same met with an accident on 13.04.2014 and was damaged in the said accident. The complainant got repaired the tractor and spent an amount of Rs.47,260/-. Thereafter, he lodged claim with the opposite parties, but his claim was repudiated, vide letter dated 26.7.2014 on the ground that the tractor was not got registered till the date of accident.

8.                Admittedly, the tractor was purchased on 19.08.2013 and temporary registration number of the same was issued by the dealer on the same day. As per provisions of Section 43 of Motor Vehicles the temporary registration is valid only for a period of 30 days. However, such period of 30 days can be extended as per the proviso under Sub Section 2 of Section 43. Thus, the complainant could get registered his vehicle within 30 days from the date of purchase, but the copy of the registration certificate Ex.C4 shows that he got the tractor registered from Registering Authority on 14.5.2014. There is nothing on the record which may show that the complainant either applied for permanent registration or made any application for extension of temporary registration on the ground of some special reasons. Thus, it is emphatically clear that the complainant did not make any effort to get his tractor registered within 30 days of issuance of temporary registration number or to get the temporary registration extended for further period. The accident had taken place on 13.4.2014 i.e. after a period of 8 months from the date of the purchase/getting temporary registration number. Till the date of accident the tractor was not got registered with any Registering Authority.

9.                Thus, plying the tractor on the road without registration certificate was not only an offence Under Section 192 of the Motor Vehicles Act, but also a fundamental breach of terms and conditions of Insurance Policy. In this context reliance may be placed on the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case Nareinder Singh Versus New India Assurance Company Ltd. & Ors. 2014(3) ACJ 218 (S.C.). Therefore, the insurance company is not liable to reimburse the complainant for expenses incurred by him on repairs of his tractor.  Consequently, repudiation of the claim of the complainant by the opposite parties no.1 and 2 was neither illegal nor unjustified and as such there was no deficiency in service on their part.

9.                As a sequel to the foregoing reasons, we do not find any merit in the present complaint. Therefore, the same is hereby dismissed. The parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced

Dated: 06.10.2016

                                                                                      (K.C.Sharma)

                                                                                         President,

                                                                             District Consumer Disputes

                                                                             Redressal Forum, Karnal.

                             (Anil Sharma)

                               Member