Delhi

New Delhi

CC/69/2013

Kuldeep Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

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

07 Jun 2019

ORDER

 

CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-VI

(DISTRICT NEW DELHI,  M-BLOCK, 1^ST FLOOR,

VIKAS BHAWAN, I.P. ESTATE. NEW DELHI-1100001.

 

C.C.No.69/2013

 

 

 Kuldeep Singh

R/o Village Neelwal,

P.O. Tikri Kalan,

New Delhi-110041                                                                                                                                     …… Complainant

 

 

Vs.

 

 

1. Branch Manager

Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd.

Office at: 12^th Floor, Dr. Gopal Dass Bhawan,

28, Barakhamba Road, Conaught Place,

New Delhi-110001.

 

2. Branch Manager

Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd.

Policy Issuing Branch:- 201-201A, 2^nd Floor,

ITL Twin Tower, Netaji Subhash Palace,

Pitampura, Delhi-110088.

 

3. Branch Manager

Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd.

Head Office: GE Plaza, Airport Road,

Yerawada, Pune-411006, India.

 

4. Mrs. Santosh

R/o. H.No. 1, Village- Prem Nagar,

Rewla Khanpur, Najafgarh,

New Delhi-110043

                                                                                                                                                                           …….. Opposite Party

 

 

 

 

 

 

ARUN KUMAR ARYA, PRESIDENT

 

O R D E R

 

 

The complainant has filed the present complaint against the OPs under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The facts as alleged in the complaint are that the complainant purchased the vehicle bearing  No.DL-4CNB-4220 car Mahendra Scorpio duly insured with OP-1,2 &3.  The complainant had purchased the said vehicle from Santosh Devi on 02.07.2012 along with existing insurance cover and was thus the second purchaser of the vehicle. The said vehicle was earlier registered in the name of OP-4 and she was the earlier owner of the vehicle and was insured by her in his name from 28.12.2011 to midnight of 27.12.2012 and was for a comprehensive cover. As the complainant had purchased the vehicle in question on 02/07/2012, he failed to transfer the insurance in his name.

2.     On 06/07/2012 the alleged vehicle of the complainant was snatched by the unknown person and the FIR of the same was lodged at PS Chapar, District Sadar, Muzaffar Nagar, UP . The complainant lodged the claim well within time with OP-2, but same is repudiated on the ground that the complainant does not have any Consumer relationship with OP-1,2 &3 .  The complainant approached OP-1,2 &3 to reconsider his claim but all in vain, complainant, therefore, approached this Forum for redressal of his grievance.

3.     Complaint has been contested by OP Insurance Company.  OP Insurance Co. has filed its written statement, wherein it denied any deficiency in services on its part and stated that the complainant do not have any Insurable interest. The contract of insurance exist only between OP Insurance Co. and OP-4,  the complainant did not have any local standi, as the OP Insurance Co. had issued the insurance policy in the name of OP-4, since, the name of the complainant was not  transferred, there is no privity of contract between complainant and the Insurance Company, hence the repudiation was justified.

4.      Short question for adjudication before us in the present case is whether the repudiation of the claim by OP Insurance Co. was justified or not. Admittedly, in the present complaint the complainant had not informed the insurance company regarding the transfer of vehicle in question in his name nor had applied for the transfer of insurance certificate in his name with OP insurance company, so that the insurer i.e. OP  may make necessary changes in the record and issue fresh certificate of insurance. Unless the aforesaid procedure is followed and complied, the transferee has no insurable interest.

5. In the present case, the complainant himself has admitted that insurance policy was in the name of OP-4. The theft took place on 06/07/2012, that means on the day of the theft, complainant had no insurable interest.

6.     In view of the above discussion, we are of the considered view that since the complainant has failed to inform the Insurance Co. about the  purchased of vehicle in question and the policy is not transferred in his name, then the Insurance Co. cannot be held liable to pay the claim.  The Insurance Co. was justified in repudiating the claim. The present complaint is devoid of any merit, same is hereby dismissed.

This final order be sent to server (www.confonet.nic.in ). A copy each of this order each be sent to both parties free of cost by post. Copy of  the  order  may be forwarded to the parties  to the case free of cost as statutorily required. File be consigned to Record Room.

Announced in open Forum on 07/06/2019.

 

(ARUN KUMAR ARYA)

          PRESIDENT

(NIPUR CHANDNA)                                                  (H M VYAS)

       MEMBER                                                                MEMBER