Jharkhand

Bokaro

CC/17/168

Mana Chadnra Rai - Complainant(s)

Versus

ICICI Lombard House Motar Insureance - Opp.Party(s)

Sunil Prasad

10 Dec 2021

ORDER

This case has been filed with prayer to pass order against the O.Ps. for payment of Rs. 110000/- as accident claim and Rs. 60000.00 and Rs. 10000.00 as compensation and litigation expenses respectively in favour of the complainant.

2       The case of the complainant in short is that, he purchased one Honda Motor Cycle from the authorized deale, which was registered with registration No. JH-09Z-2637 and it was insured with O.Ps. with insurance policy No. 3005 / 2010852925 /00 /0000004365 valid from 24-04-2015 to 23-04-2016, mean while on 10-03-2016 said vehicle met with an accident causing death of the person who was driving the vehicle and light injury to son of the complainant. Further case is that on 28-05-2016 damaged vehicle was brought to authorized showroom Premsons Honda for repairing, where it was assured that said vehicle may be repaired in Premsons  Honda or at any other place and complainant will get compensation but no complaint was received there rather it was informed that he may give complain in writing which will be uploaded on internet. Further case is that complainant got his vehicle repaired from local workshop on assurance by the Premsons Honda Showroom but when bill was submitted for payment, then, they refused the payment to the complainant.  In this way insurance company has refused to pay compensation hence it is deficiency in service causing loss to the tune of Rs. 1,10,000.00 to the complainant and compelling him to file this case before this commission.

3       on issuance of notice O.P. No.1 appeared and filed W.S. mentioning therein that this commission has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint. Further case is that complainant never lodged any complain before O.P. for alleged bill relating to repair of said motorcycle. Further it is averred that vehicle concern has been insured for the amount as IDV Rs. 66,954.00 only.  Further case is that receipt dt. 27-05-2016 is showing that son of the complainant has received the motorcycle from the P.S. concerned in presence of witnesses in good condition. Further case is that no any copy of bill related to repair of vehicle has been submitted to O.P. No.1 neither its receipts have been filed and O.P. No.1 is not aware about any accident or damage etc. as alleged. Hence no question of repudiation of the claim arise at all by the O.P. No.1, hence it is prayed to dismiss the case.

4       To support his case complainant has filed following documents –

A       Photo copy of the certificate of registration (Annexure-1).

B       Photo copy of the Driving License (Annexure-2).

C       Photo copy of Insurance Policy (Annexure-3)

D       Photo copy of retail invoice (Annexure-4)

E        Photo copy of FIR (Annexure-5 series)

F        Photo copy of death Certificate (Annexure-6)

G       Photo copy of Postmortem Report (Annexure-7)

H       Photo copy of Affidavit (Annexure-8)

I         Photo copy of Vehicle receiving receipt ((Annexure-9)

J        Photo copy of application dt. 28.05.2016(Annexure-10)

K       Photo copies of invoice etc (Annexure-11 series).

5       No any document has been filed by O.P. No.1 rather he has placed reliance on the documents filed by the complainant.

6       On careful perusal of the pleadings of the parties it appears that fact related to purchase of the vehicle, insurance of the vehicle and its accident is not in dispute. Only dispute is that whether said vehicle suffered with some damage or not ? and whether claim for repairing expense was made before O.Ps. or not ? and whether claim of the complainant has been repudiated by the O.Ps. or not ?

7       It is apparent from annexure 9 that son of the complainant namely Ramnath Roy has received the vehicle from the P.S. concerned which was well in condition as he himself has written in the receipt in presence of witnesses. This documents itself shows that vehicle was having no damage rather it was received in well condition from the P.S. concerned.

8       Only annexure 10 has been filed to show that information regarding prayer related to make payment of compensation has been furnished  to the Branch Manager, ICICI Motor Insurance Bokaro vide latter dt. 28.05.2016 but there is no paper to show that said information was actually received in the office of the O.Ps. The address as mentioned in the application dated 28.05.2016 is also not correct and it is not related to the O.Ps. Another important aspect is that accident was occurred on 10.03.2016 and alleged application was written on 28.05.2016 after expiry of more than two months period. Except above mentioned papers there is no other paper to show that intimation to the O.Ps. was given by the complainant within stipulated period. Another important fact is that till 28.05.2016 there was no repair of the vehicle concerned. Annexure 11 series are the invoice etc which are related to the month of June 2016, Sept 2016 and Oct.2016. Annexure 11 (J) is bearing no name of purchaser or seller nor it is bearing any date. Except Annexure 11 (D) other papers are not bearing vehicle No. or the name of the complainant.

8       In light of above discussion we are of the view that complainant is not able to establish the fact that he has made any claim before the O.Ps. It is also apparent that complainant has failed to establish that his claim was repudiated by the O.Ps. The annexure 11 series are creating lot of doubt and suspicion on the claim of the complainant. Therefore, we are of the view that complaint is not disclosing cause of action of the case, hence it is not maintainable and liable to dismissed.

9       Accordingly this case is dismissed. In the facts and circumstances of the case parties shall bear their own cost.