DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II

U.T. CHANDIGARH

          Complaint Case No.:585 of 2009

 Date of Inst:27.04.2009

                Date of Decision:09.03.2010

Gurpreet Singh s/o Sh.Bhupinder Singh r/o Village Dadiana, P.O.Palheri, Tehsil Bassi Pathana, District Fatehgarh Sahib.

                             ---Complainant

V E R S U S

1.   ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co., Quite Office No.10, Sector 40-B, Chandigarh through its Branch Manager.

2.  ICICI Lombard General Insurance, Zenith House, Keshavrao Khade Marg, Mahalaxmi, Mumbai  through its Chairman/Managing Director

3.  .

---Opposite Parties

QUORUM        SHRI LAKSHMAN SHARMA         PRESIDENT

              SHRI ASHOK RAJ BHANDARI      MEMBER

              SMT.MADHU MUTNEJA            MEMBER

PRESENT:      Sh.Jaswinder Singh, Adv. for complainant

Sh.Sandeep Suri, Adv. for OPs.

                            ---

PER LAKSHMAN SHARMA, PRESIDENT

          Sh.Gurpreet Singh has filed this complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 praying therein that OPs be directed to:

i)                                      Pay a sum of Rs.8,75,150/- towards repair of the vehicle.

ii)                                 Pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards taxi charges.

iii)                            Pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- as compensation for mental agony and harassment.

iv)                                 Rs.22,000/- as costs of litigation.

2.        In brief, the case of the complainant is that he purchased Ford bearing registration No.HR-70-A-581 from Sh.Rajinder Singh s/o Sh.Jit Singh r/o House No.975, Ratpur Colony, Pinjore District Panchkula. The possession of the vehicle was delivered to him on 19.11.08. The copy of the affidavit executed by Sh.Rajinder Singh regarding delivery of vehicle has been placed on record as AnnexureC-2.  The vehicle is yet to be registered in his name as the NOC was issued on 12.11.2008. The said vehicle was insured with OPs vide policy No.3001/55220275/00/B00 for the period from 18.10.08 to 17.10.09 for sum assured of 11,81,845/- in the name of Sh.Rajinder Singh against the insurance premium of Rs.28639/-. It has been pleaded that on 01.01.2009, when the complainant along with his driver Sh.Man Singh was going to pay obeisance at Gurudwara Paonta Shaib, District Sirmour (HP), stray dogs suddenly came on the road and the driver had to apply the emergency brakes due to which the vehicle skidded and fell into 20-25 meter gorge and suffered extensive damages. The complainant informed the OPs regarding the accident who told him to submit the claim along with estimate. M/s Saluja Motors Pvt. Ltd. (authorised dealer of Ford) prepared a estimate of Rs.8,75,157/-. According to the complainant, he submitted the claim along with all the necessary documents. OPs sent a letter dated 29.02.2009 to the previous owner stating that the claim is not payable on account of “No Insurable Interest”. Thereafter, the complainant made repeated visits and requests to OPs for settlement of the claim but to no effect. In these circumstances, the present complaint was filed seeking the reliefs mentioned above.

3.        In the reply filed by OPs, it has been admitted that the vehicle in question was insured vide policy No.3001/55220275/00/B00 for the period from 18.10.08 to 17.10.09 for sum assured of Rs.11,81,845/- against the premium of Rs.28,639/-. It has been pleaded that under the insurance policy, OPs are only liable to indemnify the insured/owner of the vehicle in whose name the policy issued.  According to OPs, the vehicle in question is not registered in the name of the complainant and neither the insurance policy was issued to the complainant and, therefore, there is no privity of contract between the complainant and the OPs. The complainant has no insurable interest in the vehicle and the claim is not payable to the complainant. In these circumstances, according to OPs, there is no deficiency in service on its part and the complaint deserves dismissal.

4.        We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the entire record including documents, Annexures, affidavits etc. 

5.        Admittedly, the complainant was not the registered owner of the vehicle in question on the date of the accident i.e. 01.01.2009.  Annexure C-4 is the copy of the insurance policy placed on record by the complainant himself. The perusal of the said insurance policy shows that the policy in question is issued in the name of one Sh.Rajinder Singh and not in the name of the complainant. Hence, the complainant has no insurable interest in the vehicle. Therefore, the claim of the complainant has been rightly rejected by OPs.

6.        In these circumstances, the complainant has failed to make out any case of deficiency in service against OPs. Hence, the complaint is dismissed with no order as to costs. Certified copy of this order be communicated to the parties, free of charge. After compliance file be consigned to record room.

Announced

09.03.2010   

Sd/-

                        (LAKSHMAN SHARMA)

PRESIDENT

Cm                                              `                          sd/-

(ASHOK RAJ BHANDARI)

MEMBER

Sd/-

(MADHU MUTNEJA)

MEMBER