Mrs.Kanwaljit Kaur, complainant has filed the present complaint against Future Generali Insurance Company Limited (hereinafter called, the OPs)  U/S 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter for short, the C.P.Act.) in which she has prayed that the opposite party be directed to pay insured amount as she is ready to pay the difference amount in premium if any. Opposite parties be further directed to pay Rs.20,000/- as compensation on account of mental agony, harassment and emotional distress suffered by her due to the negligent and unprofessional conduct and working of the opposite parties alongwith Rs.10,000/- as litigation expenses, in the interest of justice.   

2.       The case of the complainant in brief is that her husband Gurdial Singh was the owner of Maruti Swift Dezire Car bearing Registration No.PB-06-X-6692 and was died on 3.6.2015. She is widow of deceased. Her husband has insured his car with Future Generali Insurance Company Limited vide cover No.F 9567002 dated 18.12.2014 and the validity period of Insurance is 20.12.2014 to 19.12.2015 and total own damage premium was paid to opposite parties at the time of taking Insurance Policy. She has further pleaded that the abovesaid vehicle met with an accident on 27.03.2015 and its intimation was given to the insurer. Insurance claim was repudiated by the opposite parties vide letter dated 8.10.2015 on the ground that the insured was enjoying No Claim Bonus which he has already availed the Claim from his earlier Insurance Company i.e. National Insurance Company Ltd. Due to which she is not entitled to claim form the opposite parties as per the terms of the policy. She has next pleaded that her car remained under repair at Vijay Service Station which is Maruti Authorized Service Station, Near Railway Crossing G.T.Road, Gurdaspur and bill for repair of damaged car is Rs.1,20,777/-. The amount of bills has not been paid to her or to Vijay Service Station and illegally repudiated her claim whereas she is widow. She requested the opposite parties to pay the bills of repair of car as per the insurance but the opposite parties refused to do the needful. Thus, there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. Hence this complaint.

3.       On notice, the OPs filed its written reply taking preliminary objections that the complainant has no cause of action to file the present complaint; the complaint of the complainant is not legally maintainable; the complainant has no locus standi to file the present complaint; there is no deficiency in service on the part of the insurance company. The matter of fact is that the intimation of accident has been given. The company appointed Vikas Mahajan Surveyor and Loss Assessor to assess the loss. Several letters have been sent by the Surveyor to complete the formalities and for inspection of the vehicle, but the complainant delayed the matter. Further the surveyor assessed the loss and during verification it was found that the complainant has got NCB (No Claim Bonus) from opposite parties but during scrutiny of the documents, it has been found that the vehicle of the complainant was previously insured with National insurance Co. and in that company one claim was reported and settled during that previous policy period as per confirmation from the IIB record and also from MI record. Even the letter has been sent to the insured but no reply has been given. Due to this the claim has been repudiated vide letter dated 8.10.2015 as the complainant made false declaration at the time of getting the policy and concealed the material facts and by concealing the material facts, got NCB from the opposite parties, so the claim has rightly been repudiated. Even otherwise if the Ld.Forum comes to the conclusion that there is any liability of the Insurance Company then in that case the liability of the Insurance Co. is only as surveyor report. Vikas Mahajan Surveyor and Loss Assessor submitted his final survey report dated 9.9.2015 to the Insurance Company and as per survey report, the net loss assessed is of Rs.91,042/-. On merits, it was submitted that the vehicle has been duly surveyed by the surveyor and he submitted his report dated 9.9.2015 and as per his report the net loss assessed is of Rs.91,042/- So, the liability of the Insurance Company is only as per survey report and as per terms and conditions of the policy but as already stated the claim has been repudiated due to concealment of facts. All other averments made in the complaint has been vehemently denied and lastly prayed that the complaint may be dismissed with costs.

4.       Complainant has tendered into evidence her own affidavit Ex.C-1/A, alongwith other documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C5 and closed the evidence. 

5.       Counsel for the opposite parties tendered into evidence affidavit of Sh.Abhilash Chander Deputy Manager Ex.OP1 and of Sh.Vikas Mahajan Surveyor Ex.OP-2 alongwith other documents Ex.OP3 to Ex.OP8 and closed the evidence.

6.        From the pleadings and evidence on record it is an admitted case of both the parties to the litigation that the complainant got her vehicle bearing Registration No.PB-06-X-6692 insured with the opposite party and as such is a consumer of the opposite party. The said vehicle met with an accident and the claim was lodged with the opposite party.

7.        The claim was repudiated on the ground of concealment of material fact regarding No Claim Bonus. The complainant made false declaration that he has not taken any claim from previous insurer. We find that after receiving intimation of the accident the insurance company appointed Mr.Vikas Mahajan Surveyor to assess the loss and during verification it was found that the complainant has got NCB from opposite party. The vehicle of the complainant was previously insured with National Insurance Company and one claim was reported and settled during that previous policy period as per confirmation from IIB record and also from MI record. The complainant has also nowhere denied this fact or proved something otherwise and as such in view of law laid down by Hon’ble National Commission in a case titled as “Sh. Inderpal Rana Vs. National Insurance Co.” reported in 2015 (2) CLT 107 N.C., it has been held that if the complainant made false declaration that he has not taken any claim from previous insurer, then in that case it amounts to misrepresentation and he is not entitled for any compensation. So, the claim has rightly been repudiated.

8.      In the light of the all above, present complaint is hereby dismissed being without any merit in it.    

9.       Copy of the order be communicated to the parties free of charges. After compliance, file be consigned to record. 

                  (Naveen Puri)

                                                                                     President

ANNOUNCED:                                                            (Jagdeep Kaur)

July 11,2016.                                                               Member               

*MK*