PBEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ERNAKULAM.
Dated this the 31st day of July 2012
Filed on : 15/07/2011
Present :
Shri. A Rajesh, President.
Shri. Paul Gomez, Member.
Smt. C.K. Lekhamma, Member
C.C. No. 374/2011
Between
Aby Abraham, : Complainant
S/o. P.S. Abraham, (By Adv. Jagan Abraham M
‘Grace Villa’, Makkada P.O., George M/s. Karukapadath
Kozhikode-673 611. Associates, Empire Building,
Near High Court, Opp.
Central Police Station,
Ernakulam-682 -018. )
And
1. HDFC Ergo General Insurance Co. : Opposite parties
Ltd., #4E. 4th floor, (By Adv. Vinu Chand,
KG Oxford Business Centre, (V-319) Edassery Buildings,
Sreekandath road, Ravipuram, IIIrd floor, Room No.7,
Kochi-682 016, rep. by its Baneji road, High Court
Regional Manager-South. Jn, Cochin-31)
2. The Regional Claims
Manager-South, HDFC Ergo
General Insurance Co. Ltd.,
#4E, 4th floor, KG Oxford Business
Centre, Sreekandath road,
Ravipuram, Kochi-682 016.
O R D E R
A Rajesh, President.
To put it shortly, the case of the complainant is as follows:
The complainant purchased a Maruti car which was registered as KL 11 W 9054. The vehicle was purchased with the financial assistance of SBT Kannoor Branch. The vehicle was insured with the opposite party for the perod from 20-05-2009 to 19-05-2011 for an amount of Rs. 1,73,571/-. During the said period on 04-11-2010 the vehicle met with an accident and sustained total damage of the vehicle. The City Traffic police, Calicut registered crime No. 4057/2010 in respect of the accident. As per intimation on 05-11-2010 the surveyor of the opposite party inspected the site and assessed the damage of the vehicle. Thereafter the vehicle was taken to M/s. Popular Automobile at Calicut. Again the insurance surveyor inspected the vehicle and assessed the damage. Inspite of repeated requests the opposite party failed to disburse the value of the vehicle amounting to Rs. 1,73.571/-. The complainant has produced all the documents as directed by the opposite parties to process the claim application. The complainant is entitled to get compensation of Rs.50,000/- for the damages suffered by him. Thus the complainant is seeking direction against the opposite parties to pay the value of the vehicle with interest from the date of accident together with compensation of Rs. 50,000/- and costs of Rs. 25,000/-.
2. The version of the opposite parties.
The complainant has insured his vehicle bearing Regn. No. KL 11 W 9054 with the opposite party for the period from 20-05-2010 to 19-05-2011. On intimation about the accident the opposite parties duly deputed a surveyor to assess the damage. He assessed the damage and submitted the report. However the complainant failed to produce no objection from the financier of the vehicle and form No. 35 to the opposite party to complete the legal formalities. Thereafter the opposite party closed the process of the claim application. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties in processing the claim application. The complaint lacks bonafides and is liable to be dismissed.
3. The complainant was examined as PW1 and Exts. A1 to A11 were marked on his side. No oral evidence was adduced by the opposite parties. Exbt. B1 was marked on their side. Heard the counsel for the parties.
4. The points that came up for consideration are as follows:
i. Whether the complainant is entitled to get insurance claim of
Rs. 1,73,573/-.
ii. Whether the opposite parties are liable to pay compensation
of Rs. 50,000/- and costs of Rs. 25,000/- to the complainant.
5. Point No. i. The following issues are not disputed by the parties.
a. The complainant is the registered owner of the car bearing
Regn. No. KL 11 W 9054
b. The vehicle was insured with the opposite parties for the
period from 20-05-2010 to 19-05-2011.
c. The vehicle met with an accident on 04-11-2010 at Calicut
d. The insurance surveyor of the opposite parties inspected the
vehicle and prepared Ext. B1 survey report.
e. The opposite parties closed the process of the claim
application vide Ext. A9 letter dated 29-03-2011.
6. According to the complainant he has duly submitted the NOC from the financier and the original driving license as per the request of the opposite parties to process the claim application. In reply to Ext. A10 letter the opposite party sent Ext. A11 letter to the complainant reiterating that NOC from the financier along with the Form 35 are essential for the processing of the claim application. It is pertinent to not that the complainant has not produced the above documents either before the opposite parties or in this Forum. The opposite party categorically stated in their letters that they can not settle the claim on total loss basis without the above documents. Since the complainant has not produced the important documents to process the claim under total loss basis, we think that a direction be given to the complainant to produce the documents called for in Ext. A11 before the opposite parties if so advised whereby the opposite party shall process the same in accordance with law.
7. In the above circumstances we can not found any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties in processing the claim application of the complainant. In that view of the matter we refrain from ordering compensation and costs of the proceedings.
8. In the result, we partly allow the complaint and direct that the opposite parties shall jointly and severally process the claim application of the complainant under total loss basis, on receipt of the documents as per Ext. A11. The complainant is directed to submit the above documents within 30 days from the receipt of copy of this order. The opposite parties shall process the claim application within 30 days from the date of receipt of the above documents from the complainant. With the above observations the proceedings of this complaint in this Forum stands closed.
Pronounced in the open Forum on this the 31st day of July 2012
Sd/- A Rajesh, President.
Sd/- Paul Gomez, Member
Sd/- C.K. Lekhamma, Member.
Forwarded/By Order,
Senior Superintendent.
Appendix
Complainant’s exhibits :
Ext. A1 : Copy of insurance policy
A2 : Copy of letter dt. 14/02/2011
A3 : Copy of letter dt. 07-03-2011
A4 : Copy of letter dt. 07-03-2011
A5 : Copy of letter dt. 09-05-2011
A6 : Copy of letter dt. 24-05-2011
A7 : Copy of letter dt. 24-05-2011
A8 : Copy of letter dt. 26-05-2011
A9 : Copy of letter dt. 29/03/2011
A10 : Copy of letter dt. 07-04-2011
A11 : Copy of letter dt. 30/05/2011
Opposite party’s Exhibits : :
Ext. B1 : Preliminary Survey report
Deposition:
PW1 : Aby Abraham
