THE DISTRICT CONSUMER’S FORUM: KURNOOL
Present: Sri.Y.Reddappa Reddy, M.A., L.L.M., President,
And
Smt. S.Nazeerunnisa, B.A., B.L., Lady Member
Monday the 16th day of March, 2015
C.C.No.16/2013
Between:
M.Ranga Reddy,
S/o Krishna Reddy,
Hindu, Aged 35 Years,
Business,
R/o H.No.80-88-B, Krishna Nagar,
Kurnool-518 002. …Complainant
-Vs-
1. M/s ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Limited,
Represented by its Claims Manager,
ICICI Lombard House, #414,
Veer Savarkar Marg, Near Siddi Vinayaka Temple,
Prabhadevi, Mumbai-400 025.
2. M/S ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Limited,
Represented by is Claims Manager,
D.No.40-384/523/24, 2nd Floor,
U-Con Plaza, Park Road,
Kurnool-518 001. …OPPOSITE PARTIES
This complaint is coming on this day for orders in the presence of Sri.P.V.Ramana Reddy, Advocate for complainant and opposite party No.1 called absent and set exparte and Sri.P.Ramanjaneyulu, Advocate for opposite party No.2 and upon perusing the material papers on record, the Forum made the following.
ORDER
(As per Smt. S.Nazeerunnisa, Lady Member,)
C.C. No.16/2013
1. This complaint is filed under section 11 and 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 praying:-
- To directing the opposite parties to pay the policy amount of Rs.3,17,952/-.
- To grant the compensation of Rs.50,000/- towards compensation for causing mental agony and hard ship.
- To grant cause of the complaint.
- To award interest at the rate of 36% per annum from the date of accident.
And
- To pass such other relief as the Honourable Forum may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case.
2. The facts of the complainant in brief is as under:- The complainant is the owner of the Toofan Vehicle bearing No.AP21 TW 3072 and it was insured with opposite party No.1, under the policy bearing No.3004/69051235/00/000. The policy is comprehensive in nature and covering the risk of the vehicle for damages, and it was valid from 24.01.2012 to 23.01.2013. On 19.02.2012 the vehicle met with an accident at Sankalvagu in between Nandyal to Atmakur Road. As a result the vehicle of the complainant got damaged. The Nandyal Taluk Police Station Registered a case in Crime No.36/2012. The complainant informed the same to opposite parties. The opposite parties appointed spot surveyor by name K.V.Ramesh to assess the loss. The said surveyor inspected the damaged vehicle and submitted his report to opposite party No.2. As per the instructions of opposite parties the vehicle was shifted to Ayub Auto Garrage, Kurnool for repairs. They issued loss estimation of Rs.2,67,952/-. The surveyor also estimated the loss of damaged of the vehicle for Rs.2,67,952/-. The complainant made a claim to opposite party No.2. The complainant incurred Rs.2,67,952/- for repair of damaged vehicle. The complainant requested opposite party No.2 to settle the claim of the complainant. Because the financier of the vehicle demanded 36% interest per annum for delayed payment. The opposite party No.2 sent a letter dated 11.07.2012 stating that the opposite parties are prepared to pay only Rs.74,180/-. The complainant did not accept it. The complainant got issued legal notice dated 31.07.2012 to opposite parties. But the opposite parties did not respond either to gave reply or to settle the claim of the complainant. Then the complainant got issued legal notice on 08.11.2012 to surveyor K.V.Ramesh to furnish the copy of Surveyor Report of accident vehicle. The surveyor also did not furnish the report to the complainant. Due to the attitude to opposite parties the complainant suffered mental agony. There is a deficiency of service on the part of opposite parties. Hence this complaint.
3. Opposite party No.1 called absent and set ex-parte.
Opposite party No.2 filed written version stating that the complaint is not maintainable either in law or on facts. It is admitted that the complainant is the owner of vehicle bearing No.AP21 TW 3072 and it was insured with opposite parties company and obtained “Passengers Carrying Vehicles Package Policy” for the insured declared value of Rs.6,00,000/- for the period commencing from 24.01.2012 to 23.01.2013 vide policy bearing No.3004/69051235/00/000 and the policy was inforce as on the date of alleged accident dated 19.02.2012. After the receipt of information about the accident, the opposite party No.2 appointed an independent surveyor and loss assessor namely Sri.K.V.Ramesh to inspect the vehicle and assess the loss. The said surveyor conducted spot survey and also final survey and submitted his report on 20.04.2012 assessing the net loss of Rs.1,60,000/-. It is submitted that the complainant shifted the damaged vehicle to Ayub Auto Garrage, Kurnool with the consent of this opposite party and obtained estimation of Rs.2,67,952/- and thereafter got it repaired, but not submitted all the original bills to opposite party No.2. Opposite parties offered settlement for a sum of Rs.74,180/- as per the norms of the company on 11.07.2012. After the receipt of notice this opposite party No.2 offered to pay a sum of Rs.1,60,000/- to the complainant as the net loss assessed by the surveyor. Hence this opposite party No.2 Company was inclined to pay the same to the complainant. There is no deficiency of service on the part of opposite parties and it is liable to pay any kind of other heads of amounts including interest as claimed by the complainant.
4. On behalf of the complainant filed Ex.A1 to Ex.A13 are marked and sworn affidavit of complainant and third party affidavit of S.Ayub (PW2) is filed. On behalf of opposite parties filed Ex.B1 and Ex.B2 are marked and sworn affidavit of opposite party No.2 is filed.
5. Complainant and opposite party No.2 filed written arguments.
6. Now the points that arise for consideration are:
- Whether there is deficiency of service on the part of opposite parties?
- Whether the complainant is entitled for the relief as prayed for?
- To what relief?
7. POINTS i and ii:- Admittedly the complainant is the owner of the vehicle bearing No.AP21 TW 3072, photo copy of Registration Certificate is marked as Ex.A1. The Driving License is marked as Ex.A3. It was insured with opposite parties under the policy bearing No.3004/69051235/00/000 for the insured declared value of Rs.6,00,000/- for the period commencing from 24.01.2012 to 23.01.2013. Ex.A2 is the photo copy of Insurance Policy. The policy was inforce at the time of accident on 19.02.2012 the said vehicle was met with an accident at Sankalvagu in between Nandyal to Atmakur Road. The Nandyal Taluk Police Station Registered a Case in Crime No.36/2012 F.I.R., copy dated 20.02.2012 is marked as Ex.A4. Admittedly the complainant informed the same to opposite parties and opposite party No.2 appointed a surveyor by name Sri.K.V.Ramesh. The said surveyor conducted spot survey and final surveyor assess the loss of damaged vehicle and submitted his report the complainant submitted claim to opposite parties. It is further case of the complainant that though the surveyor submitted his report. The opposite parties did not settle the claim of the complainant. As per the instructions of opposite party No.2 the complainant shifted his vehicle to Ayub Auto Garrage, Kurnool, and he obtained loss estimation of Rs.2,67,952/-. This estimation report along with Auto Garrage Repairs Bill for Rs.63,500/- is marked as Ex.A5 dated 21.02.2012. The repair bills (Nos.21) in original are marked as Ex.A6. The affidavit of said Ayub is also filed in support of his case. The complainant requested several times to opposite party to settle the claim as he has to pay the installments to financier of the vehicle, but they did not respond. The opposite party No.2 sent a letter dated 11.07.2012 stating that the opposite parties prepared to pay Rs.74,180/- to complainant, it is marked as Ex.A7. At last the complainant got issued legal notice to opposite parties dated 31.07.2012 which is marked as Ex.A8. The postal receipts are marked as Ex.A9 and postal Acknowledgement is marked as Ex.A10. Though they received the notice, they did not choose to gave reply for it. Then the complainant got issued office copy of legal notice to surveyor to furnish the survey report dated 08.11.2012 is marked as Ex.A11. The postal acknowledgement is marked as Ex.A12. The surveyor also did not furnish the survey report. Ex.A13 are the photos of dam aged vehicle dated 19.02.2012.
The learned counsel appearing for the complainant contended that the survey report is not a genuine one, though the complainant issued legal notice to the surveyor he did not furnish his report to the complainant. The surveyor is Company surveyor he conducted with opposite parties and created Ex.B2 report for the purpose of escaping its liability. As per the mechanic estimation the opposite parties has to pay Rs.2,67,952/- and the original bills for the same are also filed. (Ex.A5 and Ex.A6).
8. The learned counsel appearing for the opposite party No.2 contended that on the intimation of accident, the opposite parties appointed an independent surveyor, he inspected the vehicle on the spot and also filed Final Survey Report by assessing the net loss at Rs.1,60,000/- Ex.B2 is the photo copy of Final Survey Report dated 20.04.2012. Ex.B1 is the photo copy of policy terms and conditions. The opposite parties offered the settlement for a sum of Rs.74,180/- as per the norms of the company under the letter dated 11.07.2012 Ex.A7. But the complainant did not accept it. Opposite party No.2 offered to pay a sum of Rs.1,60,000/- to the complainant as net loss assessed by the surveyor. But the complainant refused to receive the same. The complainant in not all entitled to the claim damages of Rs.2,67,952/-. There is no deficiency of service on the part of opposite parties.
Admittedly the complainant is the owner of the vehicle bearing No.AP21 TW 3072 (Ex.A1) and the opposite parties issued under Ex.A2 policy bearing No.3004/69051235/00/0000 for the insured declared value of Rs.6,00,000/- in favour of the complainant. The policy was in force as on the date of alleged accident dated 19.02.2012. The complainant lodged complaint to Nandyal Taluk Police Station in Crime No.36/2012 F.I.R., copy Ex.A4. Admittedly on the intimation of accident, the opposite parties appointed a surveyor by name Sri.K.V.Ramesh to inspect the vehicle and assess the loss. The said surveyor conducted spot survey assessed the net loss of Rs.1,60,000/- and filed Final Survey Report Ex.B2 to the opposite parties. Admittedly as per the instruction of opposite parties the said damaged vehicle was shifted to Ayub Auto Garrage. The said Ayub estimated the loss of Rs.2,67,952/- (Ex.A5). The vehicle got it repaired and the repairs bills in original are filed for an amount of approximately Rs.3,00,000/- (Ex.A6). The said Ayub gave an affidavit in support of the case of complainant regarding the repairs of damage vehicle and loss incurred by the complainant for an amount of Rs.2,67,952/- and further stated that he has submitted estimation report to the complainant Ex.A5 as well as to the surveyor. The damage vehicle photos are marked as Ex.A13. Though the complainant got issued legal notice to opposite parties Ex.A8, the opposite parties did not choose to gave any reply for the said notice. The complainant got issued notice to the surveyor to furnish the copy of survey report, but he did not respond to the said notice. What prejudice will cause to the opposite parties, if the surveyor furnish the copy or gave reply to the complainant. As seen from Ex.A1 to Ex.A13 it is very clear that the vehicle of the complainant was badly damaged due to the accident occurred on 19.02.2012 and the complainant incurred loss of Rs.2,67,952/- to got it repaired. The bills filed by the complainant are in original we accept the contention of the complainant. Admittedly the vehicle was insured for the insured declared value of Rs.6,00,000/- and the loss of repairs as claimed by the complainant is Rs.2,67,952/- which is less than the insured declared value. There is a deficiency of service on the part of opposite parties for not settle the claim within a reasonable time and caused mental agony to the complainant. Hence
9. POINT No.iii:- The complainant is entitled for Rs.2,67,952/- with interest at 9% per annum from the date of complaint i.e., on 14.03.2013 till the date of realization and further entitled for compensation of Rs.5,000/- towards mental agony and Rs.1,000/- as costs of the case.
10. In the result, the complaint is partly allowed directing the opposite parties jointly and severally to pay amount of Rs.2,67,952/- with interest at 9% per annum from the date of complaint i.e., on 14.03.2013 till the date of realization and further direct to pay compensation of Rs.5,000/- towards mental agony and Rs.1,000/- as costs of the case. Time for compliance is one month from the date of receipt of this order.
Dictated to the stenographer, transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced by us in the open bench on this the 16th day of March, 2015.
Sd/- Sd/-
LADY MEMBER PRESIDENT
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
Witnesses Examined
For the complainant:- Nil For the opposite parties:- Nil
List of exhibits marked for the complainant:-
Ex.A1 Photo copy of Registration Certificate (Form 23) dated 15.02.2012.
Ex.A2 Photo copy of Insurance Policy bearing No.3004/69051235/00/000.
Ex.A3 Photo copy of Driving License issued dated 12.04.2006.
EX.A4 Photo copy of F.I.R. in Crime No.36/2012 of Nandyal Taluk Police Station, Kurnool District dated 20.02.2012.
Ex.A5 Estimation Report dated 21.02.2012 Ayub Auto Garrage along with
supplementary Estimate and Bills.
Ex.A6 Vehicle bearing No.AP21 TW 3072 Repair Bills dated 12.03.2012.
Ex.A7 Letter issued by opposite party No.2 to complainant dated
11.07.2012.
Ex.A8 Office copy of Legal Notice dated 31.07.2012 given to opposite parties 1 and 2.
Ex.A9 Postal Receipts (Nos.2).
Ex.A10 Postal Acknowledgement Card.
Ex.A11 Office copy of Legal Notice to Vehicle Surveyor by Name Sri.K.V.Ramesh dated 08.11.2012.
Ex.A12 Postal Acknowledgement Card of Surveyor dated 12.11.2012.
Ex.A13 Vehicle damage photos dated 19.02.2012 (Nos.4).
List of exhibits marked for the opposite parties:-
Ex.B1 Photo copy of Police bearing No.3004/69051235/00/000 along with terms and conditions of the policy.
Ex.B2 Photo copy of Motor Survey Report (Final) dated 20.04.2012
Sd/- Sd/-
LADY MEMBER PRESIDENT
// Certified free copy communicated under Rule 4 (10) of the A.P.S.C.D.R.C. Rules, 1987//
Copy to:-
Complainant and Opposite parties :
Copy was made ready on :
Copy was dispatched on :
