ORDER SRI. K. ANIRUDHAN (MEMBER) Sri. Rajesh Babu, has filed this complaint on 08.09.2008 against the opposite parties alleging deficiency in service. The main allegations of the complainant are as follows:- He had purchased a new Motor Car having Reg. No. KL. 04W 6528 TATA INDICA – arranging a loan from a financing company and it was insured with the first opposite party through the second opposite party, on 10.10.2006 for the net value of Insurance is Rs. 3,02,812/- (Rupees Three lakh two thousand eight hundred and twelve only). The opposite parties issued policy certificate to him, along with the policy wordings, which shows that the insured vehicle would cover the accidents due to fire. On 17.07.2007 at about 11.30 PM, while driving the said vehicle by his brother, the front portion of the car burned due to some sparks, and due to that the front portion of the car was irrecoverably and completely damaged, and that the engine was totally burned to ashes. On the basis of intimation, the Police reached the site along with the fire force. The Police had registered an FIR regarding, the incident by stating that the fire had occurred, due to the electric sparks from he Battery. After that he intimated the matter to the opposite parties. The opposite parties had not taken any steps to compensate him to the loss suffered due to that incident. Without making any proper investigation and assessment the opposite parties intimating that the accident was occurred due to the fitment of LPG and same matter was not endorsed in the RC Book of necessary coverage taken in the insurance policy. Even though he sent Lawyer’s notice to the opposite parties, they have not sent any reply to him. It is further alleged that after the accident, the Car had been kept in the work shop of M/s R F Motors, Ernakulam and that the surveyor of the RF Motors assessed that the Car has a total loss. He had paid a sum of Rs. 14,000/- (Rupees Fourteen thousand only) to M/s RF Motors for parking charges and estimation charges. On 19.11.2009 he spent a sum of Rs. 2,730/- (Rupees Two thousand seven hundred and thirty only) as toeing charges of the vehicle from Alappuzha to Ernakulam RF Motors. Since there was no positive approach on the part of the opposite parties to settle the matter, he has filed this compliant seeking relief. 2. Notices were issued to the opposite parties. They entered appearance and filed version. 3. In the version of the opposite parties, they have stated that the complainant had insured the said Car with them and the policy had valid as on 17.07.2007, and the, policy conditions were issued to him, and their liability is strictly limited to terms and conditions. It is stated that the complainant did not disclose to them that the said car has been fitted with LPG unit, and that endorsement has been done in the RC and that no additional premium has been paid therefore. The fuel, that the vehicle consumed to run was stated as petrol and not LPG, and the above matter was a material suppression from disclose of fact. Due to that the policy became void and the complainant has no right to be indemnified, under the policy. It is further stated that the Car has got fire is true, but the cause is not as stated, and also admitted that the car was irrecoverably completely damaged and could not be repaired. The intimation of the matter by the complainant is belated and its has been got enquired also. It is stated that there was no loss assessment by RF Motors and no amount has be spent for that, and the complainant has no right to get Rs. 3,02,812/- . 4. Considering the contentions of the parties, this Forum has raised the following issues for considerations. 1. Whether there is any deficiently in service on the part of the opposite parties? 2. Whether the complainant is entitled to get the insured amount? 3. Compensation and costs, if any? 5. Issues 1 and 2:- Complainant has filed proof affidavit along with documents – Ext.A1 to A6 – in evidence, and he has been examined as PW1 and cross examined by the opposite parties.. Ext. A1 is the original policy wordings of the opposite parties. The policy coverage portion of the wordings stated as follows:- “Own damage to the vehicle caused by fire, Explosion, self ignition and Lightning”- Ext. A2 is the policy certificate issued to the complainant by the opposite parties. Premium of Insurance was from 10.10.2006 to 09.10.2007 mid night, and it was issued to the complainant. The IDV of the said vehicle was noted as Rs. 3,02,812/- The total premium amount was stated on Rs. 11,659/-. Ext. A3 is the attested copy of the GD extract of Aroor Police Station on 18.07.2007. It is stated that the said vehicle was caught fire on the front portion of the vehicle due to battery spark and that the engine as a whole was damaged due to that fire. Ext. A4 is Letter dtd. 15.09.2007 of the opposite party to the complainant stating that the claim is not admissible under the policy since the damage was happened due to the fitment of LPG and it was not endorsed in the RC Book. Ext. A5 is the acknowledgement Card. Ext. A6 is the Tax Invoice of M/s RF Motors showing that an amount of Rs. 14,500/- was paid by the complainant towards Garage rent and estimation charges of the said vehicle. 6. Opposite parties have not filed any proof affidavit. At the time of hearing, the opposite parties were absent. 7. On a careful readings of the entire matter of this case, and after the detailed perusal of the documents given in evidence by the complainant, it can be seen that the complainant had the valid policy issued by the opportunities (period of Insurance from 10.10.2006 to 09.10.2007) for the said vehicle at the time of the said incident on 17.07.2007. The GD Register of the Aroor Police Station (Ext. A3) shows that the burning was occurred due to the sparking from the Battery and it further shows that the engine portion of the said car was completely damaged. Ext. A1 document – policy wordings issued by the opposite parties to the complainant shows that policy covers a fire explosion, self ignition, lightning etc. Since the complainant had a valid insurance policy at the time of the said incident, he had intimated the opposite parties regarding the accident and submitted the documents for getting the insured amount of Rs. 3,02,812/-. After the accident the complainant kept the damaged vehicle before the work shop of M/s RF Motors at Ernakulam and the surveyor of M/s RF Motors have assessed aforesaid car as a total loss. For the parking charges and assessment the complainant paid a huge amount. But the opposite parties have not taken any sincere attempt to disburse the insured amount. Instead of that they have raised unnecessary contentions of the installation of LPG Gas in the Car and repudiated the claim. The opposite parties have not produced any document to show in support of their contention. Without taking the incident and damages of the car, the opposite parties have taken a negligent view by stating unnecessary matters and repudiated the claim and evaded from their liability (Ext. A4). The entire matter shows that the action of the opposite parties are totally illegal, unauthorized and arbitrary. The contentions raised by the opposite parties regarding the cause of the accident cannot be accepted since it has no locus standi. After perusing the entire case, we are of the strong view that the complaint is to be allowed, since the allegations raised by the complainant against the opposite parties, are genuine. The whole matter, shows that there is grossest deficiency in service and, culpable negligence on the part of the opposite parties, by way of repudiating the claim with out sufficient ground and against the policy conditions. So the opposite parties jointly and severely liable to pay compensations and costs to the complainant. All the issues are found in favour of the complainant. In the result, we hereby direct the opposite parties to pay the insured amount of Rs. 3,02,812/- (Rupees Three lakh two thousand eight hundred and twelve only)to the complainant, along with a sum of Rs. 16,730/- incurred in connection with the parking charges and estimation charges of the said cost, and pay a sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) as compensation for the mental agony, pain, in convenience and loss sustained by the complainant due to the grossest deficiency in service and culpable negligence on the part of the opposite parties, by way repudiated the claim without sufficient and reasonable cause and neglected to pay the insured amount in time to the complainant, and pay a sum of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) as costs of this proceedings to the complainant. We direct the opposite parties to pay the above said amounts to the complainant within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order. We further direct that in case any default to pay the amounts by the opposite parties to the complainant interest at the rate of 18% will be charged to the insured amount. Complaint allowed. Pronounced in open Forum on this the 29th day of October 2009. Sd/- Sri. K. Anirudhan Sd/- Sri. Jimmy Korah Sd/- Smt. N. Shajitha Beevi Appendix:- Evidence of the complainant:- PW 1 - Rajesh Babu (Witness) Ext. A1 - Original Policy Wording Ext. A2 - Policy Certificate (Photocopy) Ext. A3 - GD Extract of Aroor Police Station on 18.07.2007 (Photocopy) Ext. A4 - Letter dtd. 16.09.2007 Ext. A5 - Acknowledgement Card Ext. A6 - Tax Invoice of M/s RF Motors Evidence of the opposite parties:- Nil // True Copy // By Order Senior Superintendent To Complainant/Opposite Partyies/S.F. Typed by:- vo/- Compared by:-
| | [HONORABLE K.Anirudhan] Member[HONORABLE JIMMY KORAH] PRESIDENT[HONORABLE Smt;Shajitha Beevi] Member | |
