BEFORE THE A.P STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION AT HYDERABAD.
FA 723/2009 against C.C. 43/2008, Dist. Forum, Mahaboobnagar
Between:
Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Ltd.
Secunderabad *** Appellant/
. O.P.
And
Manikyala Sujatha
Mahaboobnagar *** Respondent/
Complainant
Counsel for the Appellant: M/s. V.G.S. Rao.
Counsel for the Respondent: M/s. G. Surender Reddy
CORAM:
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.APPA RAO, PRESIDENT.
&
SMT. M. SHREESHA, MEMBER
WEDNESDAY, THIS THE ELEVENTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND ELVEN
ORAL ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice D. Appa Rao, President)
***
1) This is an appeal preferred by the opposite party insurance company against the order of the Dist. Forum directing it pay Rs. 1 lakh covered under the policy together with interest, compensation and costs.
2) The case of the complainant in brief is that her husband Ramulu had taken an insurance policy on his motor cycle for a sum of Rs. 1 lakh wherein she was made as nominee. While so in a motor accident that took place on 18.10.2007 he died near Rollampalli village gate. When she made claim along with FIR, inquest, post-mortem examination report etc. the insurance company did neither settle the claim nor repudiate. Therefore she filed the complaint claiming Rs. 1 lakh covered under the policy together with interest, compensation of Rs. 50,000/- towards mental agony and costs.
3) The appellant insurance company resisted the case. While admitting issuance of policy and factum of accident and that of the death of the assured alleged that the accident was due to negligence of the deceased. He was driving the vehicle under the influence of alcohol. He violated the terms and conditions of the policy. The complainant had to prove that the deceased was having valid driving license and therefore the complainant was not entitled to any compensation, and therefore prayed for dismissal of the complaint with costs.
4) The complainant in proof of her case filed her affidavit evidence and got Exs. A1 to A16 marked while the appellant insurance company filed the affidavit evidence of its Dy. Manager (Legal) and got Exs. B1 certificate of policy marked.
5) The Dist. Forum after considering the evidence placed on record opined that repudiation was on flimsy grounds and neither Ex. A4 post-mortem examination report reveal that he was under the influence of alcohol nor that he was not having driving license. Therefore it directed the insurance company to pay Rs. 1 lakh with interest @ 9% p.a., from 1.1.2008 till the date of realization together with compensation of Rs. 2,000/- and costs of Rs. 1,000/-.
6) Aggrieved by the said decision, the insurance company preferred the appeal contending that the Dist. Forum did not appreciate either facts or law in correct perspective. It ought to have seen that the assured was under the influence of alcohol at the time when the vehicle was driven and that he was not having valid driving license and therefore repudiation was just and prayed that the complaint be dismissed.
7) The point that arises for consideration is whether the order of the Dist. Forum is vitiated by mis-appreciation of fact or law?
8) It is an undisputed fact that complainant’s husband late Ramulu had taken insurance policy Ex. B1 (A1) for a sum of Rs. 1 lakh covering the period from 14.12.2006 to 13.12.2007. It is also not in dispute that the very complainant gave a report to the police in Ex. A2 alleging that he met with accident while driving the vehicle when a lorry driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner dashed against him. Basing on which the police registered it as a case in crime No. 135/2007 u/s. 304A IPC against the driver of the lorry. An inquest was conducted by the police wherein inquestadars were of the opinion that the driver of the lorry drove it in a rash and negligent manner dashed against him resulting in his death vide Ex. A3. Post-mortem examination was also conducted by the doctor of Area Hospital, Narayanpet who after conducting the post-mortem opined that the death was due to injury to vital organ like brain. Importantly the doctor did not find any abnormality in the abdomen. What all the doctor mentioned was that
stomach contains rice. It is not known from where the insurance company could know that the deceased was under the influence of alcohol at the time when he was driving the vehicle. It has become a routine for the insurance companies to take un-substantiated please in order to evade its liability. It is unfortunate that it has been resorting to this sort of practise.
9) Except taking a plea that deceased was not having valid driving license the insurance company having received the claim did not appoint any investigator to find out whether at the time of accident the deceased was having driving license or not. Having given policy satisfied with the credentials of the assured now it cannot turn round and take all un-substantiated pleas. There could not have been any difficulty for the insurance company to prove that the assured was not having valid driving license at the time when the accident took place. It could have applied to the RTA authorities to find out the said fact. The insurance company is estopped from contending that the driver was not having valid driving license without any basis. We do not see any mis-appreciation of fact or law by the Dist. Forum in this regard. We do not see any merits in the appeal.
In the result the appeal is dismissed with costs computed at Rs. 5,000/-. Time for compliance four weeks.
1) _______________________________
PRESIDENT
2) ________________________________
MEMBER
11/05/2011
*pnr
