Haryana

Sonipat

CC/64/2015

SURENDER S/O RAM KISHAN - Complainant(s)

Versus

MANAGER ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. - Opp.Party(s)

SANDEEP DAHIYA

12 Apr 2016

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,

SONEPAT.

 

Complaint No.64 of 2015

Instituted on: 04.03.2015                 

Date of order: 12.04.2016

 

Surender son of Ram Kishan, resident of H.No.197, Kuhar pana, VPO Barwasni, tehsil and Distt. Sonepat.

 

…Complainant.           Versus

Manager, ICICI Lombard General Ins. Co. Ltd. ICICI Lombard House, 414, Veer Savarkar Marg, near Sidhi Vinayak Temple, Prabhadevi, Mumbai-400025 service to be effected upon branch office ICICI Lombard General Ins. Co. Ltd., Quit NO.10, IInd Floor, Sector 40B, Chandigarh.

                                      …Respondent.

 

COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 12 OF

THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986

 

Argued by: Sh.Sandeep Dahiya, Adv. for complainant.

Sh.Joginder Kuhar Adv. for respondent.

 

Before-  Nagender Singh-President. 

          Prabha Wati-Member.

         

 

O R D E R

 

          Complainant has filed the present complaint against the respondent alleging therein that he has purchased a Maruti Suzuki D’Zire Car bearing registration no.HR10T/5105 from its previous registered owner Ashok Kumar Rathi and the said car was already insured with the respondent for the period 15.6.2014 to 14.6.2015 and unfortunately on 22.1.2015,  the said vehicle has met with an accident and was got badly damaged.  The complainant duly got transferred the said vehicle in his name by completing all the formalities. The complainant has lodged a claim with the respondent, but the same was not responded to by the respondent on the ground that at the time of accident, the insurance of the said car was not in the name of the complainant and this wrongful act of the respondent has caused unnecessary mental agony and harassment. So, he has come to this Forum and has filed the present complaint.

2.        In reply, the respondent has submitted that the complainant has no insurable interest in the vehicle as the insurance policy is not transferred in the name of the complainant and the same is violation of the terms and conditions of the insurance policy.  NO intimation was given to the respondent about any transfer of the ownership of the vehicle in question and the insurance policy still stands in the name of previous owner Ashok Kumar and thus, no claim letter was rightly sent by the respondent to the insured vide letter dated 15.4.2015.  The complainant is not entitled for any relief and compensation as there is no deficiency in service of any kind on the part of the respondent and thus, prayed for the dismissal of the present complaint.

3.        We have heard the arguments advanced by the ld. counsel for both the parties and have perused the entire relevant documents available on the case file very carefully and minutely.

4.       Ld. Counsel for the complainant has submitted that the complainant has purchased a Maruti Suzuki D’Zire Car bearing registration no.HR10T/5105 from its previous registered owner Ashok Kumar Rathi and the said car was already insured with the respondent for the period 15.6.2014 to 14.6.2015 and unfortunately on 22.1.2015,  the said vehicle has met with an accident and was got badly damaged.  The complainant duly got transferred the said vehicle in his name by completing all the formalities. The complainant has lodged a claim with the respondent, but the same was not responded to by the respondent on the ground that at the time of accident, the insurance of the said car was not in the name of the complainant and this wrongful act of the respondent has caused unnecessary mental agony and harassment and that also amounts to a grave deficiency in service on the part of the respondent.

          Ld. Counsel for the respondent has submitted that the complainant has no insurable interest in the vehicle as the insurance policy is not transferred in the name of the complainant and the same is violation of the terms and conditions of the insurance policy.  NO intimation was given to the respondent about any transfer of the ownership of the vehicle in question and the insurance policy still stands in the name of previous owner Ashok Kumar and thus, no claim letter was rightly sent by the respondent to the insured vide letter dated 15.4.2015.  The complainant is not entitled for any relief and compensation as there is no deficiency in service of any kind on the part of the respondent.

          In the present case, the vehicle no.HR10T/5105 has met with an accident on 22.1.2015.  The complainant himself  admitted that he has purchased the said vehicle from one Ashok Kumar Rathee.  No doubt the insurance policy was valid and effective w.e.f. 15.6.2014 to 14.6.2015.   Further the perusal of the RC of the vehicle no.HR10T/5105 shows that on 2.1.2015, the RC stands in the name of Surender son of Ram Kishan, the present complaint.  But it is very sorry state of affairs that the insurance policy w.e.f. 15.6.2014 to 14.6.2015 bearing policy no.3001/MI-02094697/00/000 still stands in the name of previous owner of the vehicle i.e. Ashok Kumar Rathee. So, in our view, the complainant himself is liable for his own acts and deeds because it was the duty of the complainant himself to apply for the transfer of the insurance policy in his name immediately after getting transfer the ownership of the vehicle in his name.  But the complainant has failed to do so and thus, in our view, the complainant cannot take the benefit of his own wrongs and the action taken in the matter of the complainant by the insurance policy is perfectly legal, justified and it cannot be said that there was any kind of deficiency in service on the part of the respondent insurance company.  Thus, we find no merit in the present complaint and we dismiss the present complaint with no order as to costs.

Certified copy of this order be provided to

both the parties free of costs.

File be consigned to the record-room.

 

Prabha Wati Member                     Nagender Singh

DCDRF SNP                              President, DCDRF

                                               SNP.

ANNOUNCED 12.04.2016

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.