Orissa

Jajapur

CC/96/2018

Prafulla Kumar biswal - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S New India Assurance Co. Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Prasanta Samanta,Chinmayee Jena.

27 Nov 2020

ORDER

 IN  THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, JAJPUR.

                                                        Present:             1.Shri Jiban ballav Das, President 

                                                                                     2. Shri Pitabas Mohanty, Member

                                                                                      3. Miss Smita  Ray, Lady Member                                                

                                             Dated the 27th day of  November,2020.

                                                      C.C.Case No. 96  of 2018.

Prafulla kumar Biswal   , S/O Late Dhusasan Biswal    

Vill. Sanabhubanpur,  ,P.O. Hasinpur  ,

P.S.Jajpur Sadar  

Dist.- Jajpur .                                                                            …… ……....Complainant .                                                                   .                                    

                                                  (Versus)

 

1. M/S New India Assurance Co.Ltd, Alok Bharati Tower Sahid Nagar,Bhubaneswar.

  

      2.  M/S New India Assurance Co.Ltd, Jajpur Road, branch ,At/P.O. Jajpur Road

Dt.Jajpur .

3. Gargsan Properties (p) Ltd, capital ford ,plot No.53-26,27,28 and 29

Mancheswar Industrial Estate.SBI chhak Rasulgarh, Dt.Khurda.

                                                                                                                              ……………..Opp.Parties.                                                                                                                                           

For the Complainant:                                 Sri P.rasanta Samanta, Chinmayee Jena,Advocates

For the Opp.Parties : No.2                         Mr.Ashok ku.Dash, Advocate.

For the Opp.parties : No.1 and 3                None   

  

                                                                                                     Date of order:    27. 11.2020.

SHRI  PITABAS  MOHANTY,  M E M B E R  .

            Deficiency in Insurance service is the grievance of the petitioner.

            The facts shortly as stated by the petitioner in the complaint petition are that the petitioner is the owner of a Car ( Ford Aspire) bearing Regd. No.OD-33N-2735 which was purchased from O.P.no.3 on 19.06.2017 for private purpose  and the said car was insured with O.P.no.1 and 2 ( New India Assurance) bearing policy No.5502031170300003511 which was valid from 19.06.2017 to 18.06.2018  having IDV value Rs.6,90,196/- .It is stated by the petitioner that on 16.05.2018 the alleged car met with an accident at 12.30 a.m at the time the driver Kailash jena was driving  from Bhubaneswar to Jajpur as one Bull came in front of the car. The petitioner lodged F.I.R bearing diary  No. 08 on 17.05.2018 . Thereafter the petitioner reported the matter to O.P no.3 who after getting information not only repaired the damaged vehicle but also reported the matter to O.p.no.1 ( New India Assurance  Ltd) .After getting information the Engineer of Insurance company after maintaining the formalities though assessed loss of Rs.4,46,046/- vide bill No.2723020201800155 dt. 28.08.2018 but the O.P.no.1 on 19.11.2018 asked  a clarification from the petitioner stating that why the claim will not be repudiated since the driving license of the driver was suspended by the R.T.O from 12.04.2018 to 11.10.2018 . After getting the letter dt. 19.11.2018 though the petitioner vide his letter dt.03.12.2018  has intimated the O.P.no.1 stating that the alleged driver has been engaged by the petitioner since December-2015 . At the time of engaging the driver the petitioner has verified the driving license of the driver ( Kailsh Jena) and found that the D.L is OK for which the petitioner has appointed him ( Kailsh Jena) as the driver of the alleged vehicle .Further it is stated by the petitioner that though he has clarified his quarry on 3.12.2018  as required by O.P.no.1 vide his letter dt.19.11.2018 but the O.P.no.1without settling the Insurance claim of the petitioner remained silent for which the petitioner has suffered mental agony and monetary loss as well as such arbitrary action of O.P.no.1 is coming within the purview of deficiency in service . Accordingly the petitioner has filed the present dispute with the prayer to direct the O.p.no.1 to pay Rs.4,96,04/- towards repairing cost along with Rs.50,000/- as compensation for mental agony and loss.

                The O.ps after appearance filed the written version denying the allegation of the petitioner . The main plea taken by the O.Ps that the  petitioner /insured is not entitled for insurance claim since after getting information regarding the accident of the vehicle ,the O.ps after conducting the verification / investigation came to know that at the time of driving the vehicle by Kailsh Jena the driver did not possess valid driving license which violates the term and condition of policy.

                In view of the contradicting view we have verified the record in details as well as the documents filed from both the sides.

1. After verification of the extract of driving license vide Annexture-4 it is observed that the driving license of Kailsh Jena vide D.LNo.OR0420040076631 has been suspended by R.T.O ,Cuttack from 12.04.18 to 11.10.2018  and s the accident occurred on 16.05.2018 so it is cristal clear that driving suspension period of the D.L the alleged vehicle met with accident.
2. Further we have also  verified the affidavit of the driver Kailsh Jena which has been filed from the side of the petitioner . After verification of the affidavit of the driver it is observed that the driver has stated in the month of April though the driver has paid Rs.500/- to R.T.O as fine at the time he was driving the vehicle bearing No.OD02E4837 and thereafter the driver has not received any notice or summon.

In the above situation we are in the considered view though it is liability of O.p.no.1 that such suspension order has been served to driver (kailsh Jena) but in the present case there is no iota of evidence from the side of the O.P.no.1 that the said suspension order has been received by the driver.

                In addition to it we have also come across with the observation of Hon’ble National commission reported in 2005-CTJ-975-N.C ,wherein it is held that the

“ the owner of the vehicle is not expected to verify whether the license has been issued by competent authority in case the driver at the preliminary state produce a license which on the face looks genuine .”

2015(2)CPR-397-N.C-( New India Insurance Co.Ltd, Vrs. Bijayanananda Mohanty) wherein it is held that

                “ Insurance claim can not be out rightly rejected on ground of lock of driving license”.

                In view of the observation we are inclined to hold that non settlement of insurance claim of the petitioner by the O.p.no.1 is arbitrary . Hence this  order

                                                                                O R D E R

                The O.P.no.1 is directed to settle the Insurance claim of the petitioner amounting to Rs.4,16,046/- along with to pay compensation of Rs.10,000/-( ten thousand) within one month after receipt of this order, failing which the Insurance amount of Rs.4,16,046/- will carry an interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the dispute till its realization . Further in case the order is not complied within the stipulated period as indicated above the petitioner is at liberty to take action as per law . No cost.

                This order is pronounced in the open Forum on this the 27th  day of  November,2020. under my hand and seal of the commission ..