BEFORE THE DISTRICT FORUM:KURNOOL
Present: Sri.K.V.H. Prasad, B.A., LL.B President
And
Smt. C.Preethi, M.A.LL.B., Lady Member
Wednesday the 08th day of April, 2009
C.C.No. 20/09
Between:
Midde Jayamma,
W/o. Late M.C.Venkateswarulu,
H.No.3-44,
R/o.Ramalla Kota Village,
Veldurhy Mandal,
Kurnool District. … Complainant
Versus
- ICICI Lombord General Insurance Company Limited,
Represented by its Senior Divisional Manager,
G.B.R.Tower, D.No.2/42/1/8,
Chaitanya Puri,
Dilsuknagar,
Hyderabad - 500 001.
2. ICICI Lombord General Insurance Company Limited,Represented by its Divisional Manager,
D.No.40/384, Shop No.23,24, 2nd Floor, Ucon plaza, Kurnool - 518 001.
… Opposite parties
This complaint is coming on this day for orders in the presence of Sri. B.Chandrudu , Advocate, for the complainant, and opposite party No. 1 and 2 is called absent set exparte and upon perusing the material papers on record, the Forum made the following.
ORDER
(As per Sri. K.V.H.Prasad, President)
C.C.No.20/09
1. This case of the complainant is filed U/S 12 of C.P. Act, 1986 seeking an award in favor of complainant and against the opposite parties for an amount of Rs.2,46,799/- with a future interest at 12 % interest from the date of filling this case , alleging that her deceased husband M. C. Venkateswarulu insured his lorry bearing No. AP 21 Y 1719 with the opposite party on 11-12-2007 for a period of one year paying a premium of Rs.6,435/- and obtained policy bearing No. 3003/53085388 /00/000 covering the risk for his life and said lorry for an assured sum of Rs. 2 lakhs and during the subsistence of said policy on 10-04-2008 as the said lorry met with an accident near Dolphin Hotel of Gadda palam of Rayavaram Mandal her husband died and PS Yellamanchili registered a case in Cr.No. 01/2008 U/S 304 A , 338 and 337 IPC and inspite of her approaches the opposite parties did not pay the insurance claim .
2. In pursuance of the receipt of the notice of this forum as to this case of the complainant the opposite parties remained ex-parte by their absence and so the case is proceeded for disposal on merits.
3. In substantiation of the contentions the complainant side has taken reliance on documentary record in Ex.A1 to A6 and her sworn affidavit in reiteration of complaint averments .
4. Hence, the point for consideration is whether the complainant has made out any deficiency of the opposite parties and there by any of their liability to the complainants claim.
5. The Ex.A1 is the copy of the policy of insurance bearing No. 3003/53085388 /00/000 issued by ICICI Lombard Motor Insurance in favor of M.C.Venkateswarulu covering the risk for his life and to the newly purchased vehicle for a period commencing from 00.00 hours of 11-12-2007 to 10-12-2008 midnight . There being any rebuttal material to it what follows is that the deceased Venkateswarulu was a person covered under the Ex.A1 insurance policy .
6. The Ex.A2 is the death certificate issued by Village Revenue Officer, Ramallakota of Veldurthy Mandal of Kurnool District on 26-04-2008 . It envisages the date of demise of M.C.Venkateswarulu on 10-04-2008 at Ramallakota. The Ex.A3 is the Xerox of FIR in Cr.No. 01/2008 of Yellamanchili Traffic PS. The statement of Thummagunta Kondal Rao enclosed to said FIR on which the said FIR was issued says the driver of the lorry No. AP 21 Y 1719 died in the very said accident lorry being caught hold in between steering and seat . The Ex.A4 the Xerox of inquest held on the body of M.Chinna Venkateswarulu concerned in above Crime number also confirms the same as to the demise of M. C. Venkateswarulu . When the demise of said M. Chinna Venkateswarulu as per Ex.A3 and A4 being at the place of accident , the Ex.A2 is envisaging the place of the death of said M. Chinna Venkateswarulu at Ramallakota being inconsistent to the Ex.A3 and A4 and there by the bonafides of Ex.A2 is remaining in doubt.
7. While the Ex.A5 is the Xerox of the driving license of said M.C. Venkateswarulu , the Ex.A6 is the Xerox of the RC of the vehicle number AP.21 Y 1719 showing the said Venkateswarulu as the holder of the permit of the said vehicle . The above Ex.A5 and A6 envisage that the said M.C.Venkateswarulu was having a valid driving license to the vehicle in Ex.A6 , as there is any rebuttal for it .
8. A deficiency of insurer in non settlement of claim or repudiation of claim shall arise only when a claim has been submitted in pursuance of any insurance claim and it was either not settled or not repudiated or wrongly repudiated .
9. The complainant has not placed any such cogent material which envisage the submission of claim to the insurer and its non settlement either way by the insurer or of any of her alleged approaches to the insurer for settlement of claim . In the absence of any such cogent material it remains premature to hold as to any deficiencies of the opposite parties and there by any justification and bonafides in the alleged grievances of the complainant .
10. Consequently there being any material to hold the deficiency of the opposite parties , the complaint is not remaining entertainable and so the complaint is dismissed.
Dictated to the stenographer, transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced by us in the open bench on this the 08th day of April, 2009.
Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER PRESIDENT
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
Witnesses Examined
For the complainant :Nil For the opposite parties :Nil
List of exhibits marked for the complainant:-
Ex.A1. Copy of policy NO.3003/53085388/00/000.
Ex.A2. Death certificate.
Ex.A3. Xerox copy of FIR report.
Ex.A4. Xerox copy of Panchanama.
Ex.A5. Xerox copy of driving license.
Ex.A6. Xerox copy of registration certificate dated 05-01-2008.
List of exhibits marked for the opposite parties: Nil
Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER PRESIDENT
// Certified free copy communicated under Rule 4 (10) of the
A.P.S.C.D.R.C. Rules, 1987//
Copy to:-
Complainant and Opposite parties
Copy was made ready on :
Copy was dispatched on :
