Karnataka

Bidar

CC/23/2015

Ashok S/o Vishwanath Valande - Complainant(s)

Versus

Manager Shriram General Insurance Co. - Opp.Party(s)

Sri.Mathapathi Sanjay Adv.

21 Feb 2017

ORDER

 ::BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,

AT BIDAR::

 

 

                                                                                                                 C.C.No. 23/2015

 

                                                                                                  Date of filing : 12/03/2015

 

                                                                                              Date of disposal : 21/02/2017

 

 

P R E S E N T:-               (1) Shri. Jagannath Prasad Udgata,

                                                                                         B.A., LL.B.,

                                                                                                       President.

    

                                         (2) Shri. Shankrappa (Halipurgi),

                                                                                 B.A.LL.B.,

                                                                                           Member.

 

                                   

 

                                               

COMPLAINANT/S:        Ashok, s/o Vishwanath Valande,

                                           Age: 37 years, Occ: Business,

                                           R/o Vivekanand Chowk,

                                        Aurad Shahjani,Tq.Nilanga,

                                        Dist: Latur ( MH).

             

               

 

 

                                      (By Shri. Sanjay Mathpathi, Advocate )

 

 

                                                      VERSUS

 

OPPONENT/S   :-            1. Manager,

                                           Shriram General Insurance Co.Ltd.,

                                           E-8,EPIP,RIICO, Industrial Area, Sitapura,

                                              Jaipur-302022(Rajasthan)

 

                                       2. Division Manager,

                                              Shriram General General Insurance Co.Ltd.,

                                              Akshodaya, No.259/31,10^th cross,

                                           Wilson garden, Bengaluru.

 

                                       3. Md. Tajoddin,s/o Abdul Hameed Sab Baig,

                                              Agent/Company representative of Shriram               

                                           General Insurance Co.Ltd.,

                                           R/o Dharagiri Street, Basavakalyan,Dist.Bidar.

 

                                     

 

                                         (O.P.no.1 & 2 By Shri.Prakash V.M., Advocate)

                                         ( O.P.no.3-Exparte )  

 

 

                                                

 

::   J UD G M E N T  : :

 

 

 

By Shri. Jagannath Prasad Udgata, President.

 

 

                       This is a complaint filed by the above named complainant U/sec. 12 of C.P.Act, against O.Ps alleging deficiency in service by the O.P.s.  The subject of the case is as under.

 

2.                 The complainant is owner of Ashok Leyland Lorry bearing Reg.no.M.H.24/J-9655,  had obtained  insurance policy bearing no. JPR-4308097 and bg. TR no. 1912125 from the respondents’ Company to his vehicle during the year 2014,  covering the risk to the lorry from 06/04/2014 to 05/04/2015 and the premium amount of Rs.33,850/- was paid through cheque no.002422 of ICICI Bank, Nilanga.  The complainant avers that, while issuing the cover note the O.P promised to provide copy of the insurance within 30 days.  In spite of several request the O.Ps have not issued insurance policy copy and thereafter the O.P.no.3 on the instruction of O.P.no.1 and 2 has executed an agreement dt.26/12/2014 undertaking to indemnify the complainant in case of damages or accident caused to the lorry.  In view of said cover note a contractual relationship constituted between complainant and O.Ps Company.  The O.P.s are having contractual liability to provide insurance policy copy to complainant immediately after receipt of the premium amount.  But, the O.Ps had failed to issue the policy copy therefore, the complainant issued legal notice the O.Ps inspite of receiving the legal notice they neither replied the legal notice nor sent the insurance policy to the complainant.  Due to non availability of said Insurance Policy, the complainant has faced many problems for transportation of goods in the said lorry.  The Regional Transport Officers are also insisting to provide insurance policy copy at the time of payment of lorry to pay plying taxes, which is causing great mental harassment to the complainant.  Hence complainant is before us praying  that, the O.Ps. be directed to furnish the insurance policy and O.Ps be directed to pay compensation of Rs. 25,000/-to the complainant.

 

3.                    The O.P.no.3 in spite of service of notice from the Court has chosen to not appear before this Forum hence, the O.P.no.3 has been placed exparte.  The O.P.no.1 and 2 has filed their written version wherein they claim, complaint filed by the complainant is not maintainable either in law or on the facts.  It was not within the knowledge of the O.Ps that, the complainant is owner of vehicle bearing no. MH-24J-9655 and other averments made in para no.1 to 6 of the complaint are also not within the knowledge of the O.P.no.1 and the complainant has made the false and baseless allegation without any proper records hence, the complainant be put to strict proof of the same.  Further O.P.no.1 & 2 avered that the allegation made in the complaint  that the O.P.no.3 has issued the cover note of O.P.no.1 and 2 company is misplaced and the same was misued by the O.P.no.3 and executed the agreement by O.P.no.3 is not related to the O.P. no. 1 and 2 because, the agreement dated 26/12/2014 is executed in personal capacity of O.P.no.3 and the said transaction is completed in between complainant and O.P.no.3.  The O.P.no.3 has not informed the O.P.no.1 and 2 before executing of the said agreement.  As the cover note was misplaced the O.P.no.2 has taken necessary steps, executed an indemnity bond as this irrevocable deed of indemnity executed at Bangalore on 25/09/2014, But by over sight the year is written as  dt.25/09/2013 instead of dt.25/09/2014.   Thereafter the O.P.no.1 had taken the public notice in the News paper on 26/09/2014, seeking help and information from the public.  Again  thereafter, the O.P.no.2 has intimated to the Wilson Garden Police Station, at Bangalore on 28/09/2014.  Further O.P no.1 and 2 state that the O.P. no.3 and complainant had colluded with each other and misused the misplaced cover note of O.P.no.1 and 2 and filed this false and frivolous complaint before the  Forum  The above petition is not maintainable against the O.P.1 and 2.  Further the O.P.no.1 and 2 have not received any kind of payment form the complainant for issuing the cover note or policy, which has been shown in the  complaint.  The complainant was residing at Maharastra state hence, this Forum has  got no territorial jurisdiction to entertain the complaint and there is also delay in filing the complaint hence, the complaint filed by the complainant may be dismissed.

                     

4.                Delving back to the core of the issue, basing on the pleadings of the parties, their respective evidence, arguments and documents, the following points arise for our considerations.

 

1. Does the complainant prove that, there has been a deficiency of service in the part of the opponents?
2. Whether this Forum has the jurisdiction to try this case?
3. What order ?

  

 

 

 

5.              Our answers to the points stated above are as follows:-

 

               1.  In the affirmative.

               2.  In the affirmative.

               3. As per the final order, owing to the following:

 

 

                                                                                                      

:: REASONS ::

6. Point no.1:    This case is a manifestation of callous and chaotic manner in the part of O.P.no.1 and 2 to run their business.  In spite of receiving the charges to the tune of Rs.33,850/- as premium as is evident from Ex.P.8 ( A/c statement of the Bank) and issuance of cover not vide Ex.P.3, the O.Ps have failed to issue the relevant insurance policy to the insured, which is a sin-qua-non to be produced before the police/ transport authorities whenever demanded, while plying the motor vehicle.  Still in spite of receiving the legal notice and the amount of insurance premium credited to them in their account as is manifested from Ex.P.8, till the end, O.Ps no.1 and 2 were feigning ignorance about their obligations by resorting to jugglery of words at one hand, and on the other hand, proceeding to make news paper announcements of misplacements of cover notes and sundry, as pleaded by them.  The final nails to their coffins were drilled, when the Branch Manager of HDFC Bank Ltd (Opponent’s Banker) appeared in the Court on notice and produced the account statement as Ex.P.8.  The incalcitrancy in the part of O.Ps no.1 and 2 undoubtedly caused much hardship to the complainant to ply his vehicle regularly and hence, there is a clear case of malpractice nad deficiency of service in the part of the O.Ps no.1 and 2.  They could have simply issued a duplicate insurance certificate to come out of the quagmire, instead, they preferred to sail their sinking ship.  Hence, we answer point no.1 accordingly.

 

7.   Point no.2:       A hoopla has been raised by the O.Ps no.1 and 2 about the jurisdiction of this Forum, on imaginary and ridiculous grounds.  The records before us (especially Ex.P.8) proves that, they have received the insurance premium in their account maintained with M/s HDFC Bank Ltd, Bidar branch, proving clinchingly that, part of the cause of action has arisen at Bidar, and hence we hold that, this Forum has the jurisdiction to try this case.  The point no.2, then is answered accordingly.

 

8.                   The matter pertains to the yer 2015.  The certificate of insurance ( cover note as Ex.P.3) bears the date 05/04/2014 p.m. which was with all logical conclusion  valid till 04/04/2015 midnight.  Till the end the certificate of insurance was never issued by the O.P.no.1 and 2, which is nothing but a violation of the contract and in the process the Consumer was put to inconveniences to ply his vehicle.  The promise of insurance was never implemented by the insurance company.  Hence it is felt appropriate that, the insurance premium paid bythe insured should be refunded by the insurer to the Consumer/complainant together with compensation for the inconveniences created and cost of the proceeding and hence, we proceed to pass the following:-

 

                   

 

:: ORDER ::

 

   

        The complaint is allowed in part.

 

1. The O.P. no.1 and 2 are severally and jointly directed to refund the insurance premium of Rs.33,850/- credited to their account on 11/04/2014 along with interest @ 12% p.a. from the said date till date of realisation:
2. The O.P. no.1 and 2 are directed to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- to the complainant, towards the inconveniences and mental agony undergone together with a sum of Rs. 3,000/- as litigation expenses;
3. Acting U/s. 14(1) (f) of the C.P.Act 1986, we direct the O.Ps no.1 and 2 to refrain from adopting unfair trade practice and not to repeat the same in future, failing which the unfair trade practice would be viewed seriously.
4. The case against O.P.no.3 is rejected, he being a mere facilitator and acting on good faith.
5. Four weeks time is granted to O.Ps no.1 and 2 to comply this order.
6. A copy of this order be transmitted to the Asst. Director, Information and Publicity in print and electronic media for consumer awareness in the district.

  

 

(Typed to our dictation then corrected, signed by us and then pronounced in the open Forum on this 21^st day of February-2016)

 

 

 

   Sri. Shankrappa H.                                             Sri. Jagannath Prasad                                  

Member.                                                                President.                                                                                            

 

 

 

Documents produced by the complainant

1. Ex.P.1- Office copy of legal notice dt. 12/01/2015/
2. Ex.P.2- Three original postal receipts  
3. Ex.P.3-   Copy of cover note bearing TRno. 1912125-JPR no. 4308097,dt.05/04/2014 p.m.
4. Ex.P.4 – Copy of agreement by O.P.no.3.
5. Ex.P.5-   Bank’s account statement, dt.11/12/2014 (copy)
6. Ex.P.6-  Copy of cheque bearing no.002422, dt.05/04/2014.
7. Ex.P.7-  Copy of R.C.Book of Motor Vehicle no.M.H24/J-9655.
8. Ex.P.8- account statement submitted by HDFC
   Bank on notice.

 

9. Document produced by the Opponent/s

 

1. Ex.R.1- Copy of police complaint,dt.26/09/2014.
2. Ex.R.2-  Police acknowledgement in Form no.76 (copy)
3. Ex.R.3- Copy of Indemnity bond.
4. Ex.R.4-  Copy of news paper notice regarding loss of cover notes.
5. Ex.R.5-  Copy of another news paper notice,dt.30/09/2014.
6. Ex.R.6-  Copy of account statement of bank( Replica of Ex.P.5)

 

 

 

 

Sri. Shankrappa H.,                                             Sri. Jagannath Prasad,                                  

       Member.                                                                      President.     

 

 

 

mv.