By Sri.P.K.Sasi, President:
The case of the complainant is that on 13/11/2015, he has purchased Chevrolet Enjoy car bearing Reg.No.KL5AJ0619 by paying Rs.5,45,000/- from one Mr.Abdul Rahman. The car was having insurance policy with the opposite party valid for the period from 17/01/2015 to 16/01/2016. After purchasing the car he has submitted an application before RTO, Thrissur on the same day itself for getting the Registration Certificate transferred into his name. Accordingly he received the RC book from the RTO on 21/12/2015 stating that the change in ownership was transferred into complainant’s name with effect from 13/11/2015.
2. After receiving the RC on 22/12/2015 the complainant submitted an application before the opposite party for changing the ownership in the policy into the complainant’s name with necessary records and also paid the fees for that. After comparing the documents with original the staff of the opposite party returned the originals to the complainant. Whereas, the opposite party even after accepting the fees was not willing to make necessary changes in the insurance certificate on that day itself. It was told to the complainant by the insurance authorities to get the policy with changes in ownership had taken one week’s time and they will issue new policy certificate to the complainant. The facts being so, unfortunately, the vehicle mentioned in this complaint met with an accident on 23/12/2015. The car was collided with a lorry and the car sustained severe badly damages. It was immediately informed to the Kalady Police Station and they made G.D. entry on 24/12/2015.
3. After that complainant has entrusted the damaged car for repairing works at G.M.Motors, Puzhakkal. A claim was submitted by the complainant before the opposite party. Accordingly a surveyor was appointed by the opposite party and he has inspected the vehicle on 24/12/2015. The surveyor submitted the report stating that the ownership in RC transferred on 13/11/2015 and the ownership in policies is transferred only after 40 days. Hence the opposite party is not liable to pay any amount as compensation. There is no right for the surveyor to submit such a report. On 18/01/2016 a letter of claim repudiation has received to the complainant.
4. The complainant was submitted an application for transferring the ownership in the policy and required fees also remitted sufficiently earlier before the accident. Therefore, the policy was legally valid during the time of accident. The delay caused by the insurance company for transferring the ownership in the policy amounts to deficiency in service happened on their part.
5. For removing the car from the place of occurrence of accident to the workshop an amount of Rs.3500/- paid by the complainant. For repairing the vehicle and replacing the parts an amount of Rs.1,92,819/- is also incurred to the complainant. The complainant is entitled to get back these amounts from the opposite party. The denial of that amounts to deficiency in service on the part of opposite party. A lawyer notice was issued on 20/01/2016, and that was accepted by the opposite party on 22/01/2016. Whereas, neither any reply sent nor acted as per the notice by the opposite party. Hence this complaint is filed for getting relief.
6. On receiving complaint, notice was properly sent to the opposite party. Even after accepting the notice the opposite party neither appeared before the Forum nor filed any version. Hence they set exparte and posted for complainant’s evidence.
7. From the side of complainant he has appeared before the Forum and filed proof affidavit in which he has affirmed and narrated all the averments stated in the complaint in detail. He also produced 13 documents which are marked as Ext.P1 toP13. Ext.P1 is the policy copy; Ext.P2-copy of R.C; Ext.P3- copy of endorsement request form; Ext.P4-survey report ; Ext.P5-copy of claim rejection letter; Ext.P6-copy of certificate issued by S.I of Police, Kalady; Ext.P7-Receipt given by crane service ; Ext.P8-copy of lawyer notice dated 20/01/2016; Ext.P9-postal receipt; Ext.P10-A/D card; Ext.P11- retail invoice given by G.M. Motors; Ext.P12-invoice for works contract given by G.M. Motors and Ext.P13 series(3 Nos.) (S.P)- photographs. We heard the complainant’s counsel in detail.
8. Since there is no contra evidence available before us we are inclined to accept the proof affidavit filed by the complainant. According to the complainant the insurance benefits denied by the opposite party without genuine reason. We have gone however, the opposite party is exparte, we have perused the contents of affidavit as well as the contents of documents submitted by the complainant. Ext.P1-insurance policy would go to show that the vehicle in dispute was having the Private Car Package policy valid from 17/01/2015 to 16/01/2016 in the name of one Mr.Abdul Rahman. The Insured Declared Value(IDV) is shown as Rs.6,30,000/-. The Ext.P2 copy of RC would go to show that the vehicle in dispute is transferred into the name of complainant with effect from 13/11/2015. Ext.P3- Endorsement request submitted by Abdul Rahman before the opposite party dated 22/12/2015 and the copy of cheque for an amount of Rs.190/- in the name of opposite party would go to show that an application is properly submitted for making changes of ownership in the policy. Ext.P6 the certificate issued by S.I. of Police, Kalady would go to show that on 23/12/2015 at 10.00 pm the vehicle met with an accident. Ext.P2 copy of RC further shows that however, the ownership is transferred with effect from 13/11/2015 that was signed and issued by the concerned authority only on 11/12/2015. According to the complainant he has received the RC only on 21/12/2015, and on the next day itself he has submitted an application before the opposite party for getting the ownership changed in the policy. Ext.P5 claim rejection letter would go to show that they rejected the claim for the reason that on the date of accident the name of owner in RC differs from the name in policy. There was no insurable interest on the date of accident. Whereas, Ext. P3 would go to show that they submitted an application for transferring the name in policy on 22/12/2015 and an amount of Rs.190/- is also seen paid. It is the duty of the opposite party to make necessary changes in the policy on the very same day itself. The application is received along with the required fees for that.
9. Considering the records available before us it can be presumed that the policy has transferred into the name of complainant with effect from 22/12/2015. Therefore, the denial of the claim as per the reasons stated in Ext. P5 has not proper. Hence the opposite party has committed deficiency in service towards the complainant. And the complainant is entitled to get the amount claimed by him.
10. In the result, we allow this complaint and opposite parties are directed to pay Rs.1,96,319/-(Rupees One Lakh Ninety Six Thousand Three Hundred and Nineteen only) with 9 % interest from the date of complaint within one month from receiving copy of this order to the complainant. Failing which, he is entitled to get 9% interest till realization.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Forum, this the 29th day of July 2016.
