Chandigarh

DF-II

CC/286/2018

Ravinder Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

HDFC ERGO General Insurance Co. Ltd., - Opp.Party(s)

Devinder Kumar Adv.

26 Aug 2019

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II, U.T. CHANDIGARH

======

Consumer Complaint  No	:	286 of 2018
Date  of  Institution	:	22.05.2018
Date   of   Decision	:	26.08.2019

 

 

 

 

Ravinder Kumar s/o Sh.Kirori Lal, House NO.209/2, Gali No.10, Shanti Nagar, Mani Majra, Chandigarh.   

             ……..Complainant

 

Versus

 

1]  HDFC Ergo General Insurance Co. Ltd., having its office at SCO No.124-125, Sector 8-c, Chandigarh through its Manager.

 

2]  HDFC Ergo General Insurance Co. Ltd., Leela Business Park, 6^th Floor, Andheri Kurla Road, Mumbai 400059 through its Manager.

 

3]  HDFC Ergo General Insurance Co. Ltd., C-98, 302, 3^rd Floor, Upasna Tower, Subhash Marg,   C-Scheme, Jaipur Rajasthan through its Claims Manager. 

 

………. Opposite Parties

 

 

BEFORE:  SH.RAJAN DEWAN            PRESIDENT

SMT.PRITI MALHOTRA        MEMBER

            SH.RAVINDER SINGH         MEMBER

 

For Complainant      :    Sh.Devinder Kumar, Advocate

For Opposite Party   :    Sh.Nitish Singhi, Advocate

 

 

PER RAVINDER SINGH, MEMBER

 

         Briefly stated, the complainant got his Ford Fiesta Car bearing Regd. No.CH-01-BB-1811 insured with OPs by paying premium of Rs.36,973/- for the period from 22.3.2017 to 21.3.2018  (Ann.C-2).  It is averred that driver Yogendra Sharma, along with his friend were travelling in the said insured car from Gurugram to Jaipur on 2.10.2017 and unfortunately at about 3.30 AM the said car caught fire and the driver Yogendra, along with his friend Pawan Kumar jumped out of the car.  They called the police as well as fire brigade who reached the spot and extinguished the fire, but by that time the vehicle was extensively damaged.  The incident was also reported to the Opposite Parties, who appointed Surveyor to assess the loss. Thereafter, the complainant lodged claim with the Opposite Parties and supplied all requisite documents, but the same was repudiated by the Opposite Parties vide letter dated 5.3.2018 on the ground that the fire is not accidental in nature and is beyond the scope of the policy as per the report of the Surveyor and Investigator (Ann.C-5). It is submitted that the Opposite Parties took more than five months to process the claim and finally repudiated it on false and flimsy ground. Alleging the said repudiation as illegal and an act of deficiency in service, hence this complaint has been filed. 

 

2]       The Opposite Parties have filed reply and while admitting the factual matrix of the case, stated that after the alleged accident was report, a Surveyor was appointed to assess the loss. It is also submitted that an Investigator was also appointed to examine the loss and during investigation and forensic analysis done by him, it was found that the fire was not accidental in nature but was incendiary. It is submitted that as per the Investigation Report, the cause and origin of fire was not accidental in nature but the presence of accelerants was found which confirmed that the vehicle was intentionally burnt using some accelerants and therefore the claim of the complainant was rightly repudiated.

 

4]       Parties led evidence in support of their contentions.

 

5]       We have heard the ld.Counsel for the parties and perused the entire evidence on record.

 

6]       Zuber Ali Khan, the Investigator appointed by the Insurance Company, vide his report dated 5.3.2018 (Page/50) has opined that prior to fire, the car seems to have met with an accident and the fire was ignited by accelerants.  The Investigator, however, has not found any such object or substance on site which may cause or aggravate the fire in car.  The Investigator has also confessed in his report that due to late instructions from Insurance Company i.e. with time gap of 3 months 28 days, it is not possible to conclude with confidence as to what went wrong in the car and resulted ignition.

 

7]       The claim of the complainant has been rejected by the Opposite Parties vide letter dated 6.3.2018 (Ann.C) on the ground that the fire origin is not accidental in nature, which is contradictory to the findings of the investigator, who found that the car met with an accident before fire.  The ground of rejection of claim is illusory and superficial in nature.  The Opposite Parties have not considered the matter property in right perspective, which amounts to deficiency in service on their part. 

 

8]       The Car (Model 2014) Ford Fiesta (Titanium Diesel) was insured with IDV (Insured Declared Value) of Rs.948412/- w.e.f.22.3.2017 to 21.3.2018 with Opposite Parties.  The accident of car took place on 2.10.2017 within the insurance period and was totally damaged. 

 

9]       The complainant, the insured owner of the car Regd. No.CH-01-BB-1811 is entitled for Insured Declared Value of Rs.948412/- on account of total loss of his car in accidental fire. 

 

10]      Keeping in view the above facts, the complaint is allowed with direction to Opposite Parties to pay Rs.948412/- to the complainant with interest @6% p.a. w.e.f. 2.10.2017 till realization along with litigation cost of Rs.10,000/-. 

         The Opposite Parties jointly & severally shall comply with this order within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 

         It is made clear that the salvage/wreck of the damaged vehicle shall be retained by the Opposite Parties and they shall collect it from M/s Krishna Automobiles, Behoror, Mahindra First Choice Service Centre.

          Certified copy of this order be sent to the parties, as per rules.

Announced

26^th August, 2019                                                                  

Sd/-

 (RAJAN DEWAN)

PRESIDENT

                                                                                               

Sd/-

                                                                    (PRITI MALHOTRA)

MEMBER

 

Sd/-

(RAVINDER SINGH)

MEMBER