By Smt. C.S. Sulekha Beevi, President,

1. Complainant who is the registered owner of the vehicle KL-10/U 9797, A Toyota Camry Car is

aggrieved that opposite party failed to indemnify the loss sustained to the car due to a road accident on 14-3-2007.

2. First opposite party filed version denying the issuance of policy to complainant in regard to the said vehicle, as contended in the complaint. Second opposite party though appeared personally on 19-10-2007, did not file any written version. No specific allegation is made or relief claimed against second opposite party.

3. Evidence consists of the affidavit filed by the power of attorney holder of the complainant on behalf of complainant and the oral evidence of PW1 who is a witness examined on the side of complainant. Exts.A1 to A4 marked for complainant. Opposite party has filed counter affidavit and Exts.B1 to B6 marked for opposite party.

4. The foremost point that arises for consideration is whether the vehicle had a valid insurance coverage under first opposite party on the date of the accident.

5. It is the case of complainant that the vehicle was insured with opposite party and a Cover Note which is Ext.A3 was issued on 27-07-2006. It is also stated that a sum of Rs.33,000/- was paid by way of cheque dated, 26-7-2006 towards premium for the said policy. As per Ext.A3 the policy is valid for the period between 26-7-2006 till 26-7-2007. Complainant contends that opposite party is liable to indemnify the loss sustained tot he vehicle in the accident which occurred on 14-3-2007 which is during the currency of the policy.

6. Refuting these allegations, the existence of the policy on the relevant date, ie., 14-3-2007 is denied by opposite party. Opposite party admits issuing the said Cover note to complainant. Opposite party has produced Ext.B1 which is the Certificate of policy schedule in regard to Ext.A3 Cover note. As per Ext.B1 the policy is valid from 27-7-2006 till 26-7-2007. It is the case of opposite party that the policy which was originally issued to complainant was later forfeited for the reason that complainant had furnished false declaration regarding No Claim Bonus. It is stated by opposite party that the vehicle was previously covered under package policy of United India Insurance Company Ltd. That Ext.B1 policy issued by opposite party was a transfer/renewal of the policy from United India Company. It is further submitted on behalf of opposite party that in the proposal submitted by the complainant for issuance of policy by opposite party it was stated that complainant was entitled to No Claim Bonus (NCB) of 25%. In Ext.B1(b) which is the premium Computation table it is seen that the total own damage basic premium payable for the vehicle was Rs.38,110.20. From this complainant was given deduction of Rs.9,527.55 as NCB. Thus Ext.B1(b) proves the contention of opposite party that complainant had availed the benefit of NCB at the time of renewal/issuance of policy by opposite party. Ext.B2 is a letter sent by opposite party to United India Insurance Company under GR 27 of India Motor tariff requesting the previous insurer to confirm whether the NCB claimed by the complainant is correct. To this letter United India Insurance Company has issued Ext.B3 reply in which it is stated that 'NCB nil. OD Claim reported'. It is the say of opposite party that on coming to know that complainant had submitted false declaration, opposite party issued ext.Ext.B4 letter to complainant informing the complainant that the benefits under Section I of the policy stands forfeited. It is seen stated in Ext.B4 that along with the letter, forfeiture endorsement and a cheque for refund of Rs.32,082/- being the premium for own damage is also enclosed. Thus after forfeiture of policy the vehicle has no own damage cover and has only Third party liability cover. Complainant does not dispute that he had claimed own damage benefit from the previous insurer. It is also not controverted by complainant that the claim of NCB from opposite party was made by furnishing incorrect declaration.

Complainant does not have a case that he did not receive the letter forfeiting the policy. He does not deny receiving the cheque dated, 07-11-2006 refunding the premium after forfeiture of policy. Complainant has been less fair by suppressing such vital particulars in the complaint and affidavit. The accident took place only on 14-3-2007. Till then the complainant has not taken any steps to set the situation right. It is proved by evidence and records that the vehicle did not have own damage cover on the relevant date of accident. When the policy itself is not in existence opposite party cannot be shouldered with liability to indemnify the owner/complainant. The repudiation of claim is on sustainable grounds and is justifiable. We find opposite party not deficient in service.

7. In the result we dismiss the complaint. Parties shall suffer their respective costs.

Dated this 28th day of May, 2009.

Sd/-

C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI, PRESIDENT

Sd/-

MOHAMMED MUSTAFA KOOTHRADAN, Sd/-

MEMBER E. AYISHAKUTTY, MEMBER

APPENDIX

Witness examined on the side of the complainant : PW1

PW1 : V.K. Saboo, Surveyor.

Documents marked on the side of the complainant : Ext.A1to A4

Ext.A1 : Power of Attorney by complainant to Ali Moulavi.

Ext.A2 : Photo copy of the Motor Survey Report (Final) dated, 15-5-2007

submitted by V.K. Saboo, Surveyor & Loss Assessor.

Ext.A3 : Certificate dated, 15-3-2007 given by Sub Inspector of Police, Manjeri

to Sri.Korambi Ali.

Ext.A4 : Form of Cover Note dated, 27-7-2006 issued by opposite party

to complainant.

Witness examined on the side of the opposite parties : Nil

Documents marked on the side of the opposite parties : Ext.B1 to B6

Ext.B1(a & b) : Certificate of Insurance cum Policy Schedule with premium computation table given by opposite party to complainant.

Ext.B2 : Letter dated, 14-10-2006 from opposite party to United India

Insurance Company Ltd., Perintalmanna with copy to complainant.

Ext.B3 : Confirmation letter dated, 16-10-2006 from opposite party to United India

Insurance Company Ltd., Perintalmanna.

Ext.B4 : Forfeiture letter from opposite party to complainant.

Ext.B5 : Endorsement letter dated, 07-11-2006 from opposite party to complainant.

Ext.B6 : Photo copy of payment details from opposite party to complainant.

Sd/-

C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI, PRESIDENT

Sd/-

MOHAMMED MUSTAFA KOOTHRADAN, Sd/-

MEMBER E. AYISHAKUTTY, MEMBER