Andhra Pradesh

Visakhapatnam-II

CC/54/2012

T.U.V. South Asia Private Limited - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Limited - Opp.Party(s)

V.S. Pavan

24 Jul 2015

ORDER

                                              Date of Registration of the Complaint:17-02.2012

                                                                                                Date of Order:24.07-2015

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMERS FORUM-II AT

                             VISAKHAPATNAM

 

P  r  e  s  e  n  t:

1.  Sri H. Ananda Rao, M.A., L.L.B.,

     President           

2. Smt K. Saroja, M.A. B.L.,

     Lady Member 

                                3. Sri C.V. Rao,  M.A., B.L.,

                                     Male Member

 

                                Friday, the 24^th day of July, 2015.

                                 CONSUMER CASE No.54/2012

Between:-

M/s. T.U.V. South Asia Pvt. Ltd., represented by its

Team Head Sri Ganapathi R.S.R. Varma,

S/o Satyanarayana Raju, Hindu, aged 61 years, having

its local office at H. No. 21-176, Railway Station Road,

Yelamanchili, Visakhapatnam District.

….. Complainant

And:-

1.M/s. Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Ltd.,

   represented by its Branch Manager, Policy Servicing

   Office, 4^th Floor Destination, near Shoppers Top,

   M.G. Road, Ghatkopar (East), Mumbai.

2.M/s. Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Ltd.,

   represented by its Branch Manager, having branch at

   D. No. 10-1-44/9, 3^rd floor, Peejay Plaza, VIP Road,

   CBM Compound, Visakhapatnam.

                                                                                         …  Opposite Parties   

                     

          This case coming on 23.07.2015 for final hearing before us in the presence of Sri V.S. Pavan & Sri P. Rekha Rani, Advocates for the Complainant and  Sri  V. Parthasaradhi, Advocate for the 2^nd Opposite Party and the 1^st Opposite Party being exparte and having stood over till this date for consideration, this Forum made the following:

 

                                                ORDER

       (As per Smt. K. Saroja, Honourable Lady Member, on behalf of the Bench)

 

1.       The case of the Complainant in brief is that the Complainant a company and is doing transport business purchased a Tata Sumo bearing No. AP 10 AG 2828 made by Tata Motors Ltd., and it was insured with the Opposite Party.   The vehicle is under the valid insurance coverage of the Opposite Parties for a period of one year i.e., 08.12.2009 to 07.12.2010.   On 15.03.2010 the said vehicle was met with an accident and it was informed to the Opposite Parties.   The Complainant submitted that all the relevant papers to the Opposite Parties and requested them to release the insurance claim.   The Opposite Parties sent a letter dated 08.05.2010 upon the request of the Opposite Parties the Complainant sent documents for settlement of the claim.   On 27.09.2010 the Complainant received a letter from the Opposite Party as the Complainant did not respond to the letters on 08.05.2010 and 17.05.2010 so the Complainant’s claim was closed.    Then the Complainant issued a legal noticed dated 03.11.2011.   Hence, this Complaint.

2.       a) Award an amount of Rs.2,32,797/- (Rupees Two lakhs, thirty two thousand, Seven hundred and ninety seven only) for the damage of the vehicle as estimated by the estimator with subsequent interest @ 24% p.a.

          b) Award Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) towards damages for the mental agony caused due to the attitude of the Opposite Parties,

          c) For costs,

d) For such other relief or reliefs as the Forum deems fit and proper.

         

3.       The 1^st Opposite Party did not appear before this Forum as it was set exparte and remained exparte.

 

4.       The 2^nd Opposite Party strongly resisted the claim of the Complainant by contending, as can be seen from its counter.    The 2^nd Opposite Party stated that there was no response from the Complainant, even though the 1^st Opposite Party addressed reminders on 08.05.2010, 17.05.2010, 27.09.2010 and 04.10.2010 and finally the 1^st Opposite Party repudiated the claim of the Complainant on 28.10.2010 as there was no response on the part of the Complainant.   So, there is no liability to pay any reliefs asked by the Complainant.

 

5.       At the time of enquiry, both parties filed affidavits as well as written arguments to support their contentions.   Exs.A1 to A8 are marked for the Complainant and Exs.B1 to B6 are marked for the Opposite Parties.  Heard both sides.

 

6.       Ex.A1 is the photo copy of letter addressed by the Opposite Parties to the Complainant dated 08.05.2010.   Ex.A2 is the photo copy of Estimation issued by the VMK Motors, Kakinada to the Complainant.  Ex.A3 is the original Certificate cum Policy Schedule issued by the Opposite Parties in favour of the Complainant dated 07.12.2010.   Ex.A4 is the original letter addressed by the Opposite Parties to the Complainant dated 27.09.2010.   Ex.A5 is the photo copy of letter addressed by the Complainant to the 2^nd Opposite Party dated 04.10.2010.   Ex.A6 is the original letter addressed by the Opposite Parties to the Complainant dated 28.10.2010.   Ex.A7 is the photo copy of letter addressed by the Complainant to the 1^st Opposite Party dated 03.11.2010.   Ex.A8 is the photo copy of acknowledgement dated 04.11.2010.

 

7.       Ex.B1 is the photo copy of Private Car Package Policy Schedule issued by the Opposite Parties dated 09.12.2009.   Ex.B2 is the photo copy of Terms and conditions of the Opposite Parties.   Ex.B3 is the office copy of Ombudsman Office address issued by the Opposite Parties.   Ex.B4 is the office copy of letter issued by the Opposite Party to the Complainant dated 08.05.2010.   Ex.B5 is the office copy of letter addressed by the Opposite Parties to the Complainant dated 27.09.2010.   Ex.B6 is the office copy of letter addressed by the Opposite Parties to the Complainant dated 28.10.2010.    

 

8.       The fact shown from Ex.A1, A4, and A6 reveals that the Opposite Parties issued letters after accident intimation made by the Complainant, the Opposite Party addressed a letter on 08.05.2010 to the Complainant to send the necessary documents for settlement of the claim is as follows:1) duly filled Claim Form, 2) RC, 3) Driving Licence of the person who was driving at the time of accident, 4) Police intimation or FIR, 5) Information of the guarrage Work Shop details and 6) Provide Repair Estimation copy.   Ex.A5 reveals that upon the intimation and letters received by the Complainant, the Complainant failed to produce the documents which were asked by the Opposite Party, so the Opposite Party repudiated the claim in the absence of the Complainant’s response.   So, the claim is declared as no claim dated 28.10.2010.

 

9.       The point that would arise for determination in the case is:-

Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties.   Whether the Complainant is entitled to any reliefs asked for?

 

10.       After careful perusal of the case record, this Forum finds that there is no dispute regarding the insurance policy at the time of accident of the vehicle of the Complainant.   Though the Opposite Party issued reminders on 08.05.2010, 17.05.2010 and 27.09.2010 to send documents for settlement of the claim, the Complainant failed to submit the necessary documents to the Opposite Parties as such, the Opposite Party rightly repudiated the claim of the Complainant dated 28.10.2010 as there is no response from the Complainant’s side so the claim of the Complainant is closed as no claim.   After receiving this Ex.A6 dated 28.10.2010, the Complainant issued a legal notice to the Opposite Parties on 03.11.2010 stating that he has enclosed the necessary documents (5) in numbers which were asked by the Opposite Parties and requested them to reopen the claim file for further proceedings.  As the case is unsubstantiated by producing the necessary documents, the Complainant failed to produce FIR/Complaint copy, RC and Driving licence of the driver, who was driving at the time of the vehicle which was met with an accident which are not produced before this Forum also.   So, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties.   Hence, the claim put forward by the Complainant is untenable and liable to be dismissed in limini.

 

11.     In the result, this complaint is dismissed.   No costs.

Dictated to the Steno, transcribed by him, corrected and pronounced by us in the Open Forum, this the ^24th day of July, 2015.

 

Sd/-                                   Sd/-                                             Sd/-   

President                          Male Member                                Lady Member

 

                                       APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

For the Complainant:-

NO.	DATE	DESCRIPTIONOFTHEDOCUMENTS	REMARKS
Ex.A01	08.05.2010	Letter addressed by the Ops to the Complainant	Photo copy
Ex.A02		Estimation issued by the VMK Motors, Kakinada to the Complainant	Photo copy
Ex.A03	07.12.2010	Certificate cum Policy Schedule issued by the Ops in favour of the Complainant	Original
Ex.A04	27.09.2010	Letter addressed by the Ops to the Complainant	Original
Ex.A05	04.10.2010	Letter addressed by the Complainant to the 2nd OP	Photo copy
Ex.A06	28.10.2010	Letter addressed by the Ops to the Complainant	Original
Ex.A07	03.11.2010	Letter addressed by the Complainant to the 1st OP	Photo copy
Ex.A08	04.11.2010	Acknowledgement	Photo copy

For the Opposite Parties:-                                                                                                              

                                      

NO.	DATE	DESCRIPTIONOFTHEDOCUMENTS	REMARKS
Ex.B01	09.12.2009	Private Car Package Policy Schedule issued by the Ops	Photo copy
Ex.B02		Terms and conditions of the Ops	Photo copy
Ex.B03		Ombudsman Office address issued  by the Ops	Office copy
Ex.B04	08.05.2010	Letter issued by the OP to the Complainant	Office copy
Ex.B05	27.09.2010	Letter addressed by the Ops to the Complainant	Office copy
Ex.B06	28.10.2010	Letter addressed by the Ops to the Complainant	Office copy

                                                                                            

 

Sd/-                                       Sd/-                                          Sd/-    

President                              Male Member                            Lady Member