BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KOZHIKODE.
C.C.178/2010
Dated this the 13th day of June 2012.
( Present: Sri. G. Yadunadhan, B.A., LLB. : President)
Smt. Jayasree Kallat, M.A. : Member
Sri. L. Jyothikumar, B.A., LLB. : Member
ORDER
By Jayasree Kallat, Member.
The petition was filed on 11.05.2010. The complainant owns a ford Fiesta Car bearing No.KL.52/4041. The car was insured with the first opposite party for the period from 22.09.2007 to 21.09.2008. It was a comprehensive policy meanwhile the car met with an accident at Kozhikode. In the previous years the vehicle was insured with Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd. Complainant had taken the new policy of the vehicle for the year 2007 to 2008 due to the canvassing for the insurance business by the opposite party’s agent. On 03.01.2008 due to the car accident a third party was injured and extensive damage was caused to the vehicle. The complainant intimated the incident to the opposite party. On 14.01.2008 complainant received a communication from the opposite party informing the forfeiture of the policy along with an ante-dated cheque drawn by the opposite parties in favour of the petitioner. Complainant is alleging the forfeiture of the policy by the opposite parties. After accepting the premium amounts to deficiency in service. Hence the petition.
The opposite parties 1 to 3 filed a joint version denying the averments in the complaint except those that are expressly admitted. Opposite party admits that the complainant owns a ford fiesta car bearing No.KL.52/4041 and the vehicle was insured with the opposite party for a period from 22.09.2007 to 21.09.2008. At the time of issuing the policy the complainant had given an undertaking cum declaration for no claim bonus entitlement.. The previous insurer was Bajaj Allianz General Insurance. When opposite party enquired the matter with Bajaj alliance Company it was found that the complainant had preferred three claims on 30.05.2007, 17.02.2007 and 21.10.2007. On receipt of this information the opposite party informed the complainant that as per the provision of Indian Motor Tariff all benefits under section 1 of the said policy stands forfeited from the date of commencement 22.09.2007 of the said policy. Opposite party had sent a cheque for Rs.19,963/- dtd.24.12.2007 as refund of premium to the complainant. The complainant had accepted the cheque. The allegation of the complaint that there was deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party is false. The complainant ought to have informed the opposite party about the accident and the claims preferred during the period of the previous policy. The complainant had suppressed the material facts. As there was no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties, the opposite parties are not liable to pay any amount to the complainant. Hence opposite party prays to dismiss the petition.
The complainant was cross examined as PW1 and Exts.A1 to A13 were marked on complainant’s side. OP was examined as RW1. No documental evidence on OP’s side.
The only point for consideration is whether the complainant is entitled for any relief.
The case of the complainant is that his ford fiesta car bearing No.KL.52/4041 was insured with the opposite party for the period from 22.09.2007 to 21.09.2008. Policy was issued to the complainant on 03.01.2008 the car met with an accident near Kozhikode causing injuries to a third party and also extensive damage to the vehicle. On 14.01.2008 the opposite party had informed the complainant of forfeiture of the policy of its coverage under section 1. A cheque was also sent to the complainant by the opposite party as refund of the premium. The complainant alleges that he had to incur an amount of Rs.75000/- for the repair of the car for its damage due to the accident. According to the complainant opposite party had forfeited the policy after informing about the accident. Complainant is alleging the act of the opposite party as negligent and deficient in service.
The opposite parties on the contrary contents that the complainant had preferred 3 claims on 30.05.2007,17.02.2007 and 21.10.2007 from the earlier insurer Bajaj Allianz General Insurance who had insured complainant’s Vehicle. The complainant had declared no claim bonus on the policy as 0%. When the opposite party enquired the earlier insurer Bajaj Allianz General Insurance they received an intimation from Bajaj which showed that complainant had claimed 3 times on 30.05.2007,17.02.2007 and 21.10.2007 from the earlier Insurance Company. Ext.A6 produced by the complainant is the document which shows the earlier 3 claims by the complainant. According to the opposite party the complainant had suppressed material facts. On getting the information the opposite party had informed the complainant regarding the forfeiture and also returned back Rs.19963/-towards the refund of premium on 24.12.2007. The complainant had accepted the cheque. Complainant has not produced any report showing the extent of the damage to the vehicle. Complainant himself adduced evidence as PW1 that he has not produced any surveyors report, any bills or body mahazar of the vehicle. We are of the opinion that , the complainant has not produced any documents to prove the deficiency in service of the opposite party. More over complainant had accepted the refund money of the premium from the opposite party. In such a circumstance we are of the opinion that the complainant is not entitled for any relief.
In the result the petition is liable to be dismissed.
Pronounced in the open court this the 13th day of June 2012.
Date of filing:11.05.2010.
SD/-PRESIDENT SD/-MEMBER SD/-MEMBER
APPENDIX
Documents exhibited for the complainant:
A1.Cash bill receipt of Kannankandy Motors dtd.02.02.2008 for Rs.34950/-(3sheets)
(36850/-,15700/-)
A2.Letter to the complainant dtd.13/11/2007
A3.Photo copy of the letter by opposite party dtd nil
A4. Photocopy of cheque dtad.24.12.2007 for Rs.19,963/-
A5.Endorsement forfeiture of section 1 -details of vehicle dtd.22.09.2007
A6.Notice to the opposite party dtd.17.12.2007
A7. Notice sent to the opposite party with cover acknowledgement
A8.Registered lawyer Notice to opposite party dtd 12.05.2008.
A9.Postal receipt of lawyer notice sent to Ist opposite party dtd. 13.05.08
A10. Postal receipt of lawyer notice sent to second opposite party dtd.13.05.08.
A11.Postal Acknowledgment card 16.05.08.
A12.Postal Acknowledgment card dtd.16.05.2008
A13.Certificate of Insurance cum policy schedule dtd.22.09.07.
Documents exhibited for the opposite party:
Nil
Witness examined for the complainant:
PW1.Mohandas(Complainant)
Witness examined for the opposite party”
RW1. Ambili George, 2nd Floor, Chicago plaza, Near K.S.R.T.C bus stand Cochin.
Sd/-President
//True copy//
(Forwarded/By Order)
SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT
