KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

VAZHUTHACAUD THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

 APPEAL NO.895/03

JUDGMENT  DATED 19.1.2011

PRESENT

JUSTICE SHRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU                --  PRESIDENT

SRI.M.K.ABDULLA SONA                                --  MEMBER

The Branch Manager,

 Punjab National Bank Ltd;                                 --  APPELLANT

Chandranagar Branch,

Chandranagar, Palakkad.                                                                                                                          (By Adv.Sreelal Warriar)

                   Vs.

G.Harish,

S/o Late Gopalakrishnan,                                   --  RESPONDENT

Mambaram Kalam,

Kinassery, Palakkad.     

(By Adv.N.K.Karnis & Ors.)

                                                 JUDGMENT

JUSTICE SHRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU,PRESIDENT

         The appellant is the opposite party/bank in OP.316/01 in the file of CDRF, Palakkad.  The appellants are under orders to pay a sum of Rs.25,000/- as compensation and cost of Rs.1000/-.

          2. The case of the complainant is that the opposite party/bank that provided loan for the purchase of   scooter owned by his deceased father did not renew the premium of insurance in time and thereby he has been in capacitated to claim   compensation from the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal subsequent on the death of his father due to the injuries sustained in the road accident.

          3. In the version filed the opposite party it is contended that    it is the duty of the owner of the scooter to obtain insurance for the vehicle and to renew the same periodically and that the same has been specified in the loan agreement itself and hence there is no violation of any obligations on the part of the opposite parties.

          4. The evidence adduced consisted of the proof affidavits filed by the respective sides and Exts.A1 to A5 and B1 to B4.

          5. The Forum   has relied on Ext.A4 letter dated 14.8.2000 and its postal cover ie; Ext.A5 which would show that the letter was received by the complainant only on 23.11.01.  The genuineness of the date of the letter was suspected as the accident is dated 12.2.01.  As per Ext.A4 letter, father of the complainant was requested to pay the insurance premium.  According to the Forum, the letter appeared to be pre-dated in order to escape liability.    

          6. As noted by the Forum, Ext.B2 hypothecation agreement provides that the registered owner should keep the vehicle fully insured for any loss or damage.  It is also to be noted that the person using the vehicle is liable to have at least 3^rd party coverage.    The above liability cannot be cast upon the bank.

          7. In the circumstances, we find that the order of the forum that the bank is liable to renew the policy periodically cannot be upheld.

          In the circumstances, the order of the Forum is set aside.  The appeal is allowed.

JUSTICE  K.R.UDAYABHANU --  PRESIDENT

 M.K.ABDULLA SONA --  MEMBER