D.o.F:04/10/2011
D.o.Order:03/4/2013
IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KASARAGOD
CC.NO.252/11
Dated this, the 3rd day of April 2013
PRESENT:
SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ : PRESIDENT
SMT.BEENA.K.G : MEMBER
Dr. Mahesh.G.K
S/o Late G.K.Ganapathy,
Krishna Kripa, Perla, and now : Complainant
Mallyas compound, Nullipady,
Po.Kasaragod.
(Adv.Anantharama.P,Kasaragod)
1.The Manager,
Road Safety Club Pvt Ltd, No.1 Ist floor,
Sambandam Street, C.N.Chetty Road,
T.Nagara,Chennai 600017.
2. The General Manager,
Shriram Transport Finance Co.Ltd, : Opposite parties
101-105 Shivcaambers, Ist Floor B.Wing Sector-11,
C.B.D Belapur Navi Mumbai, 400614.
3. The Manager, Shriram Transport Finance Co.Ltd,
Thalangara Gate Opp Indian Oil Petrol Bank,
Nullipady Po Kasaragod.
(Adv.K.A.Lalan,Kasaragod)
ORDER
SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ : PRESIDENT
Complainant is a physician. He is possessing a car and a motorcycle. In the year 2002 the agent of opposite parties 2&3 approached the complainant and represented that their Finance company has started a Road Safety Package in tie up with ist opposite party And if the complainant join in the said scheme he will get insurance cover for a period of 8 years and if no claim is made against the policies the safety bonus entitlement of Rs.20,000/- will be paid to the complainant. Accordingly, complainant joined in the scheme from July 2002 to July 2010. Since there was no claim during the period of the scheme which was in force, complainant made a claim before opposite parties. Bu they did not pay the amount as offered. Hence the complaint.
2. According to Ist opposite party there is no refund clause in Road Safety Club programme. As per the terms and conditions Ist opposite party will be paid Safety Bonus in case of no claims are made during the tenure of scheme. Complainant was a member of Ist opposite party for a period of 8 years for which he paid Rs. 3500/-vide cheque No.208171 dtd 22-7-2002 drawn on HDFC Bank. He availed group Insurance policy benefits during the period of his membership. He was provided insurance cover in respect of his life and the policy details are as follows;
Insurance Companies Policy No’s Period
Bajaj Allianz General Ins Com.Ltd 501996000000005 22-7-09 to 21-07-10
Bajaj Allianz General Ins Com.Ltd 501996000000005 22-7-08 to 21-07-09
Bajaj Allianz General Ins Com.Ltd 501996000000005 22-7-07 to 21-07-08
Bajaj Allianz General Ins Com.Ltd 501996000000005 22-7-06 to 21-07-07
National Insurance company 42/03/8200089 22/7/05 to 21/7/06
National Insurance company 42/03/8200089 22/7/04 to 21/7/05
Tata AIG General Insurance GPA0000120 22-07-03 to 21-07-04
Tata AIG General Insurance GPA0000120 22-07-02 to 21-07-03
The Ist opposite party is totally unaware of the claim which are claimed by their members since the policy holders are at liberty to claim directly with the insurance companies. Therefore Ist opposite party insisted for a no claim certificate from the above insurance companies to enable the complainant to obtain no claim certificate. The first opposite party has not denied the responsibility of paying Safety Driving Bonus to the complainant. Hence there is no deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties. The Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint and the terms and condition clearly manifested that the disputes shall be subject to the jurisdiction of Chennai courts only. Hence for lack of jurisdiction also the complaint is not maintainable and the Ist opposite party is ready to pay safe Driving Bonus Rs.3500/- to the complainant on producing the No claim certificate.
3. Complainant filed proof affidavit and Exts.A1 to A14 marked . Complainant cross examined on his affidavit.
4. The points arises for determination are
1. Whether this Forum has got territorial jurisdiction to adjudicate the case?
2. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties?
3. Whether the complainant is entitled for any relief claimed?.
4. What is the order as to cost and compensation?
5. Point No.1: The contention of the opposite parties is that the Forum lacks jurisdiction to adjudicate the matter in view of the condition mentioned in Ext.A1 certificate that the disputes shall be subject to the jurisdiction of the Chennai Courts only. This contention is not sustainable. Firstly, the complainant is not a signatory to Ext.A1. Hence it is a unilateral one. Secondly, the Forum can take cognizance on the matters coming within the purview of Sec.11(2) (a) (b)(c) of the Consumer Protection Act. As per Sec.11(2)(a) if the opposite party or each of the opposite parties , where there are more than one at the time of institution of the complaint, actually and voluntarily resides or carries on business or has a branch office or personally works for gain then such cases can be filed within the jurisdiction of that Forum. In the case on hand the opposite parties carried on their business of Road Safety Package within the territorial limits of this Forum also. Hence they are bound to acquiesce to the jurisdiction of this Forum.
Therefore this issue is found against the opposite parties.
6. For the sake of convenience and brevity points 2 to 4 are discussed together.
According to complainant he is possessing both motorcycle and car. He joined in the scheme by paying Rs. 8000/-in cash. But according to opposite party complainant paid Rs.3500/- by cheque dtd 22-7-2002 with cheque No.208171 drawn on HDFC Bank. As against this complainant in his affidavit has asserted that he had no account in HDFC Bank and hence he has not issued such a cheque to the opposite parties.
7. The further contention of opposite parties is that the policy holders can directly settle the claim with insurance companies and that is why they are insisting for no claim certificate from the insurance companies to ascertain whether the member is claimed any benefits from the insurance companies. But at the same time they have no case that they have send the policies to the members during the subsistence of Road
Safety Package without communicating the policy details of every years. But it is pertenent to note that complainant has not stated the amount he paid to opposite parties for joining in the scheme either in his complaint or in his affidavit. Ext.A1 is the Membership Certificate issued to the complainant. In Ext.A1, the membership scheme is noted as CLASSIC and mode of payment is noted as cheque/ draft No.37581.
It is further noted in Ext.A1 that the Membership is valid subject to realisation of cheque. Moreover on the reverse side of Ext.A1,
terms and conditions of Road Safety Programme are noted. There also the payment mode of membership fee is noted. As per that the cheque/ DD should be drawn in favour of Road Safety Club(P) Ltd and crossed account payee. This being the facts we cannot comprehend how and why the complainant paid Rs. 8000/- in cash to the opposite parties. The complainant was in possession of Ext.A1 certificate for 8 years and it is strange to believe that he had not find those entries in Ext.A1. Hence it is not believable that he paid Rs. 8000/- in cash to the opposite parties.
Now according to opposite party as per the scheme complainant is entitled for safe driving bonus after 8 years in case of Gold
card and Rs. 3000/-in case of silver card for that he has to produce certificate from insurance companies that he has not made any claim with them during the subsistence of policy as the members are at liberty to settle the claims directly with the insurers without any involvment of Ist
opposite party. But it is important to note that none of the policies or their details were ever send to the members of the scheme. The opposite parties had no case that they have sent either original or copy of the policy drawn by them to the concerned members . In fact whether there is any claim is filed or not is easily identifiable by the opposite parties themselves through internet or by communicating with the insurance
companies before settling the claim. Further Ext.A1 is silent about the procurement or submission of the No claim certificates
from insurance companies to pay the safe driving bonus to a member. So it is clear that it is only an extra condition now put forth to evade the payment of safe driving bonus.
7. Most importantly complainant has joined in classic scheme as per Ext.A1. But it is not decipherable which or what type of card is issued to him. As per the terms and condition contained in Ext.A1 Rs. 20,000/- will be refunded for gold card holders and Rs.3000/- in case of silver card holders. But on a bare look of the classic card issued to the complainant it is not distingushable whether it is a gold card or silver card.
8. So from the above stated reason also from the character and conduct of opposite parties it is manifest that they committed deficiency in their service rendered to the complainant. Hence they are liable to compensate the complainant.
9. According to the complainant he paid Rs. 8000/- in cash to become a member in the scheme. But according to opposite party complainant paid Rs. 3500/- by way of cheque. Though complainant has disputed that he had no account in the HDFC Bank, he did not produce any document to show that he is not a holder of such an account in HDFC Bank. Further he also failed to submit any document to show that he remitted Rs. 8000/-ato the agent of opposite parties that too contrary to the terms and conditions of the Road safety Programme. Therefore the only inference possible is that the complainant had paid only Rs. 3500/- to the opposite parties.
In the result the complaint is partly allowed and the opposite parties 1 to 3 are jointly and severally directed to pay Rs.3000/- to the complainant towards safe driving bonus together with a cost of Rs.2500/-. Time for compliance is one month from the date of receipt of copy of the order failing which Rs. 3000/- will further carry interest 12% per annum from 21-7-2010 to till date of payment.
Exts:
A1-Membership Certificate
A2-Classic card
A3-Copy of RC
A4-copy of RC
A5-to A7- 18-2-11-letter issued by Pw1 to Insurance companies
A8 to A10-Courier receipts
A1- 13-6-11-letter issued by PW to Ist OP
A12&A13- postal receipts
PW1- Dr.Mahesh.G.K.-complainant
Sd Sd
MEMBER PRESIDENT
eva
forwarded by Order
SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT
