Punjab

Gurdaspur

CC/326/2019

Aru Bhalla - Complainant(s)

Versus

ICICI Lombard Gen. Insurance Co. - Opp.Party(s)

Saravjeet Singh Walia , Adv

02 Dec 2022

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, GURDASPUR
DISTRICT ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLEX , B BLOCK ,2nd Floor Room No. 328
 
Complaint Case No. CC/326/2019
( Date of Filing : 06 Nov 2019 )
 
1. Aru Bhalla
Arun Bhalla son of Shri Parshotam Bhalla r/o Batala
Gurdaspur
Punjab
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. ICICI Lombard Gen. Insurance Co.
ICICI Lombard Gen. Insurance Co.ltd. ICICI Lombard House,414,Veer Savarkar marg, Near Sudhi Vinayak temple , Prabha Devi , Mumbai
Mumbai
Maharashtra
2. ANURADHA SHARMA insurance agent of ICICI , Lombard General INsurance Co. Ltd.
ANURADHA SHARMA insurance agent of ICICI , Lombard General INsurance Co. Ltd. Agency Code ILG 41090 TF 1-5 , Third 88 The Mall , Servicing Branch , Ludhinia
Ludhinia
Punjab
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
  Sh. Naveen Puri PRESIDENT
  Sh.Bhagwan Singh Matharu. MEMBER
 
PRESENT:Saravjeet Singh Walia , Adv , Advocate for the Complainant 1
 Sh.Sandeep Ohri, Adv. for OP. No.1. OP. No.2 given up., Advocate for the Opp. Party 1
Dated : 02 Dec 2022
Final Order / Judgement

The titled Complainant Sh.Arun Bhalla (Aadhar # 582802545529 - Ex.A1) aggrieved at repudiation (Ex.A6) of his Car-Accident Insurance-Claim on account of non-payment of 15 Year Past Road-Tax has filed the present complaint against the titled opposite party insurers (namely: ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd) seeking release of full amount of his Car Repair Bill of Rs.1,16,284.80p (Ex.A3) against the related Insurance Policy IDV of Rs.70,000/- (Sic!) besides Rs.50,000/- as compensation etc., in the interest of justice.

2.       The complainant has been the owner of Maruti Make Car Model 2002 with R.C.No.PB-18-G-7990 and had comprehensively insured it with the OP insurers @ IDV of Rs.70,000/- through Policy No.3001/134484190/00/000 (Ex.A2) valid from 13.08.2017 to 12.08.2018. Somehow, the said Car met with Road-side Accident on 28.07.2018 (Ex.A4) and the related Accident Repair Claim No. MOTO7829585 dated 05.09.2018 for Rs.1,16,284.80p (Ex.A5) was filed with the OP insurers duly supported by the requisitioned documents etc. However, the OP insurers rejected the Accident-Claim on an arbitrary ground of non-payment of the Road Tax post 15 Year Period after the year 2017 of the 2002 Model Car. The complainant has pleaded that he has been insuring his Car since its purchase in the year 2002 from the OP insurers but he has never availed of any claim but presently the OP insurers have rejected the claim on flimsy grounds and even the served upon legal notice (Ex.A7) has failed to move them hence the present complaint with the aforesaid reliefs etc. Additional documents: Ex.A8– Plastic Surgery Estimates of the index finger injured in the accident; Ex.A9– Recovery Van charges; Ex C10 to Ex.A14– Photos of the accident-ed Car; Ex.A15– Missing Report of the Car R.C. and Ex.A16– Postal Receipt of the Legal Notice + Rejoinder.

3.       The titled opposite party No.1 insurers, in response to the commission’s summons/notice  appeared through their counsel and filed the written statement/ reply stating therein preliminary as well as other objections (on merits, as well) as:

4.       That the complaint is not maintainable as the complainant has neither 'cause of action' nor 'locus-standee' to file the present complaint. And, there has been 'No deficiency in Service' on their part. In fact, the complainant's Car has been insured for an IDV (Insured Depreciated Value) of Rs.70,000/- only and thus the OP liability stood limited by the IDV & further it was found that the complainant had not paid the Car's Road Tax at the time of the Road Accident which violated the provisions of the Motor Vehicle Act and thus the claim has been rightly repudiated. On merits, the same objections/pleadings, as above, are repeated and lastly the OP insurers have sought dismissal of the present complaint and have also filed the listed documents (along with the duly Sworn Affidavit Ex.OPW1/A by their Sh.Aditya Pandey Authorized Signatory) in evidence as: Ex.OP1–Copy of Repudiation 01.11.2018 by  the OP Insurers; Ex.OP1/2–Copy of OP Requisition Letter 05.09.2018 to the complainant; Ex.OP1/3–Copy of Claim Intimation Sheet; Ex.OP1/4–Copy of Claim Registration Letter; Ex.OP5–Copy of Survey Report 05.10.2018; Ex.OP1/6–Copy of Risk Assumption Letter 18.08.2017; Ex.OP1/7–Copy of the Policy Wording;

5.       The complainant has filed his written arguments on 04.12. 2020 vide had also filed his request in writing dated 04.02.2020 seeking permission to give up the opposite party 2 and the same was accorded vide the commission's orders of even date.

6.       We have duly heard the learned counsels for both the sides, on points of law, and have also thoroughly examined the records with requisite care and caution on the points of fact, as placed before us. We are also inclined to examine the inference it’s ‘scope n spread’ on account of some documents ignored to be produced/not-produced during the course of the present proceedings.

7.       We observe that the OP insurers' prime objection/ pleading favoring its claim repudiation has been that the complainant has not paid the insured Car's Road Tax past the 15 year period of its purchase in the year 2002 i.e. after the year 2017. We find that the complainant has been getting his Model 2002 Car insured from the OP insurers since its purchase sans any claim and the last policy cover has been valid w e from 13.08.2017 to 12.08.2018 and there has been no understanding/agreement/contract/consent etc. that the car's tax will be paid during the pendency of the policy in the year 2018 post 2017 and presently, the OP insurers are stopped to take the present plea with retrospective effect.

8.       We thus discard the OP insurers' above pleadings/arguments, being in total contravention of the laws of natural justice. We are of the considered opinion at the face of the evidenced-facts as available on the records that there’s have been an unfair display of its superior/dominant position by the OP1 Insurers in settling the accident-claim that they have been legally bound to honor of course up to the IDV level, only; and as such the impugned ‘repudiation’ on the OP1 insurer's part of the insurance-claim, in question, had been unwarranted, arbitrary and unfair; neither in accordance with the provisions of the statutory law nor in conformity with the sanctity of natural justice, equity and good conscience. Further, it has violated with impunity the preferred statutory consumer rights of the young complainant causing him much physical harassment, mental agony and financial loss in his routine peaceful life. Lastly, we hold the insurers guilty of statutory misconduct amounting to ‘unfair trade practices/deficiency in service’ and thus liable to an adverse award under the provisions of the governing statute. However, the OP insurers in order to pay the impugned claim shall be at liberty to procure certified copies of the requisite document(s), if any, from the records of the present complaint, in accordance with the prescribed rules.   

9.       In the light of the all above, we order the opposite party insurers to pay the impugned claim @ the policy's full IDV of Rs.70,000/- with interest @ 9% PA from the date of accident/loss (till paid in full) besides Rs.15,000/- in lump sum as cost cum compensation within 45 days of receipt of the certified copy of these orders otherwise the aggregated award amount shall attract an additional interest @ 3% PA from the date of the orders till realization, in full.          

10.      The complaint could not be decided within the stipulated period due to heavy pendency of Court Cases, vacancies in the office and due to pandemic of Covid-19.

11.      Copy of the order be communicated to the parties free of charges. After compliance, file be consigned to record.           

                                                               (Naveen Puri)

                                                                 President.

                                                        

ANNOUNCED:                                     (B.S.Matharu)

DEC. 02, 2022.                                            Member.

YP.

 
 
[ Sh. Naveen Puri]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[ Sh.Bhagwan Singh Matharu.]
MEMBER
 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.