DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SANGRUR.
Complaint No. 268
Instituted on: 06.06.2017
Decided on: 13.10.2017
1.Rajni aged 28 years widow of late Shri Ashok Kumar son of Raj Kumar, resident of W.No.5, Dhuri, Tehsil Dhuri, Distt. Sangrur.
2.Aradiya aged 3 years D/o Late Shri Ashok Kumar,
3.Abhishake aged 1 year 10 months son of late Shri Ashok Kumar, both minor under the guardianship of their mother Rajni widow of late Shri Ashok Kumar.
4.Savitary Devi aged 55 years w/o Shri Raj Kumar, resident of Ward No.5, Dhuri, Tehsil Dhuri, Distt. Sangrur.
…Complainant
Versus
1. The Iffco Tokio General Insurance Co. Ltd through its Branch Manager Sangrur.
2. The Branch Manager, Iffco Tokio General Insurance Company Ltd. 2nd Floor, above hotel Hot Chop, Sangrur.
..Opposite parties
For the complainant : Ms.Gurpreet Kaur, Adv.
For OPs : Shri Darshan Gupta, Adv.
Quorum: Sukhpal Singh Gill, President
Sarita Garg, Member
Vinod Kumar Gulati, Member
Order by : Sukhpal Singh Gill, President.
1. Mrs. Rajnji along with other complainants such as son, daughter and mother of Ashok Kumar (referred to as complainant in short) have preferred the present complaint against the opposite parties (referred to as OPs in short) on the ground that the husband of the complainant Shri Ashok Kumar was the owner and driver of the motorcycle bearing registration number PB-13-AP-8829 which was got insured from the OPs vide policy number 93282972 for the period from 18.7.2015 to 17.7.2016 and the complainant was also insured for Rs.1,00,000/- under the PA policy for Rs.1,00,000/-. Further case of the complainant is that Shri Ashok Kumar met with an accident on 1.11.2015 and suffered multiple injuries and as such was taken to Civil Hospital Dhuri and from where he was referred to Rajindera Hospital, Patiala and PGI Chandigarh, where he succumbed to the injuries on 9.11.2015. The complainant also got lodged the DDR number 4 dated 3.11.2015 at PS Dhuri. Thereafter the complainant submitted all the required documents for getting the insurance claim, but despite approaching the Ops time and again nothing was paid. Thus, alleging deficiency in service on the part of the OPs, the complainant has prayed that the OPs be directed to pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- along with interest @ 18% per annum under the PA policy and further claimed compensation for mental torture, agony and harassment and litigation expenses.
2. In the written reply filed by the OPs, legal objections are taken up on the grounds that the complaint is not maintainable, that the complainant has not come to the Forum with clean hand and has concealed material facts, that the complainant has not submitted all the requisite documents with the claim form such as FIR, death certificate and legal heir certificate issued by SDM and that the complainant has dragged the OPs into unwanted litigation. On merits, it is admitted that the motorcycle in question is insured with the OPs under the policy for the period from 18.7.2015 to 17.7.2016 and is further admitted that the deceased Ashok Kumar was insured for Rs.1,00,000/- under the PA policy regarding accidental death only. However, it is stated that since the complainant did not submit the requisite documents such as FIR, death certificate and legal heir certificate, the claim could not be settled. However, any deficiency in service on the part of the Ops has been denied in toto.
3. The learned counsel for the complainant has produced Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-13 copies of documents and affidavit closed evidence. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the OPs has produced Ex.OP-1 to Ex.OP-7 copies of documents and affidavit and closed evidence.
4. We have very carefully perused the complaint, version of the opposite parties, evidence produced on the file and written submissions and also heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties. In our opinion, the complaint merits acceptance, for these reasons.
5. It is an admitted case of the parties that the husband of the complainant, namely, Shri Ashok Kumar (referred to as DLA in short) got insured his motorcycle in question with the Ops and under the policy he was also insured for Rs.1,00,000/- under the PA policy in case of accidental death only. It is not in dispute that the DLA died an accidental death as he met with an accident on 1.11.2015 and died on 9.11.2015 at PGI Chandigarh. Ex.C-3 is the copy of policy on record and Ex.C-4 is the copy of death certificate of the DLA Ashok Kumar. Ex.C-5 is the copy of post mortem report which further supports that the DLA died in an accidental death. In the present case, the contention of the learned counsel for the OPs is that the complainant did not submit the required documents such as copy of DDR, copy of post-mortem report and copy of legal heir certificate duly issued by the competent officer. We may mention here that the complainant has already produced on record the copy of death certificate Ex.C-4, copy of post-mortem report Ex.C-5 and copy of DDR Ex.C-15 on record. The complainant has already arrayed as the son, daughter and mother of the DLA as a party in the present case and there is no other legal heir of the DLA. Moreover, we feel that the succession certificate is not a necessary document on the basis of which the claim cannot be thrown by the Ops. Further, it is proved case that the DLA died an accidental death on 9.11.2015, as he met with an accident on 1.11.2015 and as such took treatment from Civil Hospital, Dhuri, Rajindra Hospital Patiala and PGI Chandigarh and at PGI Chandigarh he succumbed to the injuries on 9.11.2015. In the circumstances of the case, we feel that the complainants are entitled to get the insurance amount of Rs.1,00,000/- under the insurance policy, which the Ops have not paid without assigning any cogent, reliable and trustworthy reason.
6. In view of our above discussion, we allow the complaint and direct the Ops to pay to the complainants in equal share an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the present complaint i.e. 06.06.2017 till realisation. We further direct the OPs to pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.5,000/- in lieu of compensation for mental tension, agony and harassment as well as litigation expenses. This order of ours shall be complied with by the OPs within a period of thirty days of receipt of copy of this order. A copy of the order be issued to the parties free of cost. File be consigned to records.
Pronounced.
October 13, 2017.
(Sukhpal Singh Gill)
President
(Sarita Garg)
Member
(Vinod Kumar Gulati)
Member
