BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-I, U.T. CHANDIGARH ======== Consumer Complaint No | : | 345 of 2010 | Date of Institution | : | 14.06.2010 | Date of Decision | : | 16.06.2011 |
Nikhil Syal S/o Sh. Parmod Syal, Resident of H. No. 1187, Sector 44-B, Chandigarh. …..Complainant V E R S U S 1] ICICI Lombard Motor Insurance, through its Manager, Quite office No. 10, Sector 41, Chandigarh. 2] ICICI Lombard Motor Insurance, through its Manager, Zenith House, Keshav Rao Khare Marg, Mata Laxmi, Mumbai 400004. ……Opposite Party CORAM: SH.P.D.GOEL, PRESIDENT SH.RAJINDER SINGH GILL, MEMBER Argued by: Sh.Jagvir Sharma, Advocate for complainant Sh.Sandeep Suri, Advocate for OPs. --- PER P.D. GOEL, PRESIDENT Brief facts of the case are that the complainant got his Honda Civic Car bearing registration No.HR-68-B(T) 0003 having chassis No.MAKFD152H6N00 1962 insured with OPs bearing cover Note No. 52593261 dated 22.8.2008 by paying a premium of Rs.21905/- and the said insurance was valid from 22.8.208 to 21.8.2009. On 19.2.2009 the said car which was parked outside the house of the complainant caught fire at about 5:30 A.M. due to which the car got totally damaged. DDR bearing No.14 dated 19.2.2009 was lodged with Police Station 34, Chandigarh and a claim with the OPs for reimbursement of the insurance value of the car was filed. The complainant alleged that the OPs has not decided the claim for last six months. Being harassed at the hands of the OPs, the complainant got served a legal notice upon the OPs but to no avail. Hence this complaint. 2. In their joint reply the OPs took some preliminary objections. On merits, the averments made in the complaint were denied. It has been replied that the vehicle insured under the insurance policy is bearing registration No.HR-68-B-0003 and not the car bearing registration No.HR-68-B(T) 0003. It has further been pleaded that the claim was repudiated on the ground that the car has been burnt purposely, which is evident from the forensic report. The loss caused is attributable to burning of the car by sprinking of petroleum product (hydrocarbon). There is no accidental fire. Thus it is a case of arson which is not covered under the policy conditions. All other allegations of the complaint has been denied and prayed for dismissal of the complaint. 3. The Parties led evidence in support their contentions. 4. We have heard the Learned Counsel parties and have also perused the record. 5. Learned counsel for the OPs No.1 and 2 raised the arguments that vide Annexure C-2, the insured vehicle is HR-68-B-0003 and not the Car bearing registration No.HR-68-B(T) 0003 and therefore, Ops are not liable to pay any claim to the complainant as per the terms and conditions of the insurance policy. 6. The registration certificate of the vehicle bearing registration No.HR-68-B(T) 0003 is Annexure C-1 on the record and against column No.6, the chassis of the vehicle has been recorded as MAKFD152H6N00 whereas vide Annexure C-2 i.e. certificate cum policy schedule, the chassis No. of the vehicle has been recorded as 001962. It is made clear that the complainant has lodged the claim with regard to the vehicle in question and not the vehicle bearing registration No.HR-68-B-0003. Further that the chassis number of the vehicle in question does not tally with the insured vehicle. 7. Undisputedly, the engine number of both the vehicles tally, which is not sufficient to hold that it is the same vehicle which is insured with the OP when the chassis number and the registration number of the vehicle in question (HR-68-B(T)-0003) did not match with the insured vehicle(HR-68-B-0003). 8. This being so, it can legitimately be concluded that the vehicle bearing registration No.HR-68-B-0003 was insured with the insurance company and not the vehicle bearing registration No.HR-68-B(T) 0003. 9. The matter does not rest here. OPs have repudiated the claim on the ground that the car has been burnt purposely which is evident from the report of Directorate of Forensic Science, Sector 18/A, Gandhinagar at page 14 wherein it has been stated that the residues of petroleum hydrocarbons were detected in the content of exhibit. The said report of the Directorate of Forensic Science has gone unrebutted and un-controverted. Thus, it is held that the cause of fire is due to residues of petroleum hydrocarbons and not due to fire. 10. In view of the above findings, it is held that the claim of the complainant is not payable as per the terms and conditions of the insurance policy and the same has been rightly repudiated by OP. Hence, the complaint is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs. 11. Certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. The file be consigned. | | Sd/- | Sd/- | 16.06.2011 | | [Rajinder Singh Gill] | [P.D.Goel] | | | Member | President |
cm
| | MR. RAJINDER SINGH GILL, MEMBER | HONABLE MR. P. D. Goel, PRESIDENT | , | | 
