Complainants Hardish Kaur and Lovepreet Singh had filed the present complaint U/s 35 of Consumer Protection Act against the opposite parties and praying that the opposite parties be directed to pay Rs.2 Lakh or more as per rules as PA Cover of Driver-Owner, IDV Value of Rs.23,500/- of insured vehicle alongwith interest @ 18% per annum from the date of accident or from filing the claim petition to them/opposite parties alongwith compensation of Rs.2 Lakh for causing mental agony and harassment to them or any other order as this Hon'ble Commission, deems fit may also be passed, in the interest of justice.
2. The case of the complainants in brief is that they got their Honda Motorcycle Activa 3G insured with the opposite parties by availing their services and Rs.1914/- as premium was paid to the opposite parties by complainant No.2 alongwith GST 18% and addon features like Total Own Damage Premium of Rs.527/- PA Cover for owner-driver Rs.375- was paid in the policy No.3005/167626244/00/B00, the period of which was from March 28, 2019 to March 27, 2020. It was pleaded that on 29.03.2020 at about 11:30 AM an accident took place with one Swift Dzire Car in the area of Peer Bagh GT Road, Gurdaspur in which husband of complainant No.1 and father of complainant No.2 namely Ranjit Singh died and FIR No.22 dated 29.03.2020 was got registered against accused Navjot Singh son of Gurnam Singh on the statement of complainant No.1 U/s 304-A/427 IPC at Police Station Sadar Gurdaspur and post-mortem on the dead body of the deceased husband of the complainant No.1 was conducted at Civil Hospital Gurdaspur. It is further pleaded that Rs.1905/- was received by the opposite parties on account of the renewal policy No. 3005/167626244/01/B00 of Honda Motorcycle Activa bearing registration No.PB-06-AF-3084, Chasis No.701689 and Engine No.4016917 which was fully damaged alongwith 18% GST which included Total IDV Value of Rs.23,500/-, Total Own Damage Premium Rs.347/- PA Cover for Owner cum Driver, Rs.515/- Total Premium, Rs.1905/- unnamed PA cover for 2 persons and Rs.140/-within the grace period of 30 days from 27 March 2020 due to Pandemic of Covid-19. It was also pleaded that after the date of accident i.e. 29.03.2020 complainants approached the opposite parties during the outbreak of Covid-19's pandemic, by visiting their office personally and by moving application in writing but the opposite did not pay the insured amount of Owner-Driver, Full damage claim of the vehicle involved in the accident despite of receipt of PA Cover amount of Rs.515/- and Total Premium of Rs.1905/- and refused to settle the claim of the complainants, whereas as per the policy terms and conditions Driver's clause means any person including the insured which holds an effective learner's driving license at the time of accident and is not disqualified from holding or obtaining such a license may also drive the vehicle as per rule 3 of Central Motor Vehicles Rules 1989 and insurance companies are also directed by the IRDAI to include this cover to owner drivers at all classes of vehicles for an additional premium of Rs.515/- included in the annual policy and as per the head of the insurance company i.e. ICICI Lombard insurers will have the freedom to offer a cover that is higher than Rs.15 Lakh. Complainants also claimed IDV of the vehicle in question, Rs.575/- as PA Cover for owner driver, Rs.15 Lakh as unnamed PA Cover alongwith interest @ 18% per annum from the date of accident/intimation to the company, Rs.5 Lakh as compensation for causing metal agony and harassment to them alongwith Rs.1,00,000/- as litigation expenses. It was further pleaded that on April 1, 2020, notifications were issued by the Ministry of Finance stating that the renewal dates of health and motor insurance policies which fall in the period from March 25, 2020 to April 14, 2020 had been extended till April 21, 2020 due to Corona Virus Lockdown. Moreover, the renewal of policy was within grace period of 30 days and opposite parties had charged premium of comprehensive package and NCB @ 25% in the policy dated 10 April, 2020. Complainants again and again approached the opposite parties with folded hands and requested them to redress their grievance and to admit their genuine claim but the officials of the opposite parties showed reluctance/high headedness attitude and kept the matter pending on one pretext or the other and finally refused to admit their genuine claim and did not pay any heed towards their requests which is clear cut deficiency in service on their part, hence this complaint.
3. Upon notice opposite parties appeared through their counsel and filed written reply by taking the preliminary objections that the complainant has no cause of action and locus standi to file the present complaint; complaint of the complainant is premature as complainant neither filed any claim nor mentioned any claim no. as such no question of deciding the claim arises and the complaint is liable to be dismissed. It is further pleaded that there is no deficiency in services on the part of the opposite parties and it is fault of the complainant who failed to file any claim and now on the basis of this complaint the company is going to initiate the proceedings regarding the claim and that the policy given in the present complaint is not admitted and the validity of the policy shall be checked during the process of claim. On merits, it was stated that no claim has been filed and no policy was issued by the company and complainant may be directed to file proper claim before the insurance company and to provide all the relevant documents. It was further stated that no such IRDA regulations has been produced by the complainant on the file. All other averments made in the complaint have been specifically denied and lastly prayed for dismissal of complaint with costs.
4. Counsel for the complaint had tendered into evidence affidavit of Hardish Kaur Ex.CW1/A, alongwith copies of documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C9 and closed the evidence on behalf of complainant.
5. On the other hand counsel for the opposite parties had filed affidavit of Nishant Gera Manager Legal Ex.OP-1/A.
6. Rejoinder not filed by the complainants.
7. Written arguments filed by the complainants but not filed by opposite parties, however we have heard the counsels for the parties and we have carefully examined all the documents/evidence produced on record and have also judiciously considered and perused the arguments duly put forth by the learned counsels for the parties.
8. Counsel for the complainants has argued that complainants had purchased one Honda Activa scooter which was insured with the opposite parties vide policy of insurance Ex.C1 valid from 28.03.2019 to 27.03.2020. It is further argued that on 29.03.2020 Late Sh.Ranjit Singh was driving the said scooter and met with an accident and later on died. F.I.R. in this respect was registered copy of which is Ex.C4. Copy Post Mortem Report is Ex.C3 and copy of Death Certificate Ex.C5. Ld. counsel for the complainant has further argued that although the policy of insurance had lapsed on 27.03.2020. However, in view of the notification issued by Ministry of Finance Govt. of India the existing policy in respect of which renewal was due from 25.03.2020 to 14.04.2020 can be renewed upto 21.04.2020 and accordingly the case of the complainants also falls under said notification and accordingly the complainants being legal heirs of deceased Sh.Ranjit Singh are entitled to the benefits under the policy of insurance. However, failure of the opposite parties not to settle and pay the claim amounts of deficiency in service.
9. On the other hand Ld. counsel for the opposite parties has argued that complaint is premature as complainants have failed to lodge any claim with the opposite parties till the filing of the complaint and as such the complainants be directed to lodge the claim with the opposite parties to enable the opposite parties to settle the claim.
10. We have heard the Ld. counsels for the parties and gone through the record. To prove the case counsel for the complainant has placed on record duly sworn affidavit of Hardish Kaur Ex.CW1/A, policy of insurance Ex.C1 as per which scooter No.PB-06-AF-3084 was insured w.e.f. 10.04.2020 to 09.04.2021. The previous policy in respect of said scooter is valid from 28.03.2019 to 27.03.2020. As per registration certificate (R.C.) complainant No.2 is the registered owner of the scooter and the said registered owner Lovepreet Singh had purchased the original policy of insurance in respect of said scooter and thereafter got the policy of insurance renewed as per Ex.C1. Death of Sh.Ranjit Singh is also proved on account of accident as per F.I.R. Ex.C4. Post Mortem Report on the dead body of Sh.Ranjit Sigh Ex.C3 and death certificate Ex.C5 also confirmed the death of Sh.Ranjit Singh on account of accident on 29.03.2020. The only disputed question before this Commission is whether the opposite parties were justified not to settling and paying the claim of the complainants as per the policy of insurance. However, perusal of file and evidence on record shows that policy of insurance Ex.C-1 is a renewed policy in which no claim bonus @ 25% has been given. However, claim of the complainants has not been settled by the opposite parties inspite of fact that the said policy of insurance has been renewed in view of the notification issued by the Ministry of Finance Govt. of India. Accordingly, the present complaint is hereby disposed off with the directions to the opposite parties to settle the claim lodged by the complainants within 45 days of the receipt of copy of orders in view of the above said notification.
11. 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.
12. Copy of the order be communicated to the parties free of charges. After compliance, file be consigned to record room.
(Lalit Mohan Dogra)
President
Announced: (B.S.Matharu)
July 19, 2023 Member
*YP*