BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION AT BANGALORE (URBAN)

DATED 15^th DAY OF DECEMBER 2023

ORDER

SMT. SUMA ANILKUMAR, MEMBER

The complaint filed U/S 35 of Consumer Protection Act 2019, complainant seeking direction towards OP for the following reliefs:-

1. Order for payment of insured declared value (IDV) of Rs.1,48,244/- to the complainant together with interest @ 18% compounded monthly from the date of receipt of payment till the date of payment.
2. To pay Rs.1,00,000/- towards wrongful loss caused by the OP to complainant, towards mental agony, economic loss caused as stated above.
3. To grant cost of this proceedings.
4. To grant such other necessary relief or reliefs as this Hon’ble Court deemed fit in the above complaint under this circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity.

2. Brief facts of this case are as follows:-

The Complainant submit that she is the absolute owner of the Car bearing Registration No.KA-02-MF-6007, Maruthi Swift Dezire, Chassi No.MA3ESKD1500374844 Engine No.K12MN1109420. The OP No.1 is the insurer of the said car and issued policy No.2311/61646373/00/000 dated 05.08.2020 valid from 13.09.2020 to 12.09.2021. The OP No.2 is the authorized service and repair centre of Maruthi Swift Dzire car for the regular service with the OP No.2. The complainant submits that on 11.12.2020 around 8.15 p.m., there was a fire accident in the service centre of the OP No.2 situated in the above address. The cars housed at the service centre completely burnt including Maruthi Swift Dzire VXI car belonging to the complainant. The jurisdictional police authorities i.e., Hennur Police Station, Bangalore received the complaint on 12.12.2020. The complainant further submits that the complainant had obtained comprehensive insurance policy from the OP valid from 13.09.2020 to 12.09.2021.

3. In view of the loss of her car, she approached OP No.1 claiming amount from it based upon the insurance policy referred above. The OP No.1 ought to have made the payment based upon the policy to the complainant. But OP No.1 failed and neglected to pay the insured amount to the complainant and disputed the liability with malafide intention and issued on endorsement on 27.02.2021. It is pertinent to state that entrusting the Swift Dzire Car to the service centre is not amounting to motor trade or claim does not come under exceptions mentioned in Clause 2 of the policy. The false endorsement given by the OP No.1 caused mental torture and agony and monetary loss to the complainant. The complainant approached the office of Insurance Ombudsman but it has not considered the plea of complainant. The complainant submits that the reason for non-payment assigned by OP No.1 is incorrect and uncalled for. On the other hand they ought to have made the payment of insured declared value (IDV) of Rs.1,48,244/- immediately after receipt of the demand from the complainant in terms of policy. The complainant submits that OP No.1 is legally bound to pay the amount of insured declared value (IDV) of Rs.1,48,244/- to the complainant. It is using the money of the complainant for its trade purpose and withholding the same in order to wrongful enrich itself. Hence, OP No.1 is liable to pay interest on the said amount @ 18% per annum compounded monthly from the date of accident from 11.12.2020 to till the date of payment.

4. The complainant submits that, she is suffered because of negligence on the part of the OP No.2 and no fault of complainant, she is suffering because of burning of her car in the service centre of the OP No.2. The complainant approached the OPs for her money on several occasions, but they failed and neglected to pay the same, that causes of mental torture and agony to the complainant. Hence this complaint by the complainant. The complainant has approached office of the Insurance Ombudsman which is disallowed.

5. OP No.2 placed Ex-parte and in view of the lapse of 45 days OP’s version is not considered.

6. The Complainant has filed affidavit evidence with 14 documents marked as Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.14. The complainant has filed written arguments.

7. On the basis of above pleadings for our consideration are as follows:-

i) Whether the complainant proves the deficiency of service on the part of OPs?

ii) Whether complainant is entitled for the relief?

iii) What order?

8.  Our answers to the above points are as follows:-

Point No.1:- Affirmative.

Point No.2:- Partly Affirmative.

Point No.3:- As per the final order.

                      REASONS

9. Point No.1&2:- These points are inter-connected to each other and for the sake of convenience, to avoid repetition of facts, these points are taken up together for common discussion.

10. On perusal of the documents submitted by the complainant, according to the Ex.P.1 it is clear that the complainant is the owner of the vehicle of Maruthi Swift Dzire L XI with bearing registration No.Ka-02-MF-6007. In the Ex.P.2 we see that the complainant has taken insurance policy from OP No.1 for her private vehicle Maruthi Swift Dzire L XI dated 05.08.2020 holding policy No.2311/61646373/00/000 valid from 15.09.2020 to 12.09.2021.

11. The Ex.P.3 shows that the complainant’s husband left the car for service with Vishwas Car Service Private Limited on 02.12.2020. According to Ex.P.4, Ex.P.5 and Ex.P.6, it is clear that there is fire accident occurred in the service centr i.e. Vishwas Car Service Private Limited and an FIR is filed with the police regarding the same. On perusal of the Mahazaar report submitted by the Police, we see that in the list of cars that are burnt completely, the complainant’s car i.e. KA-02-MF-6007 is completely burnt. This shows that the complainant with no mistake of her’s and due to accident occurred, lost her vehicle for which she had taken insurance policy worth Rs.1,48,244/- from OP company. The complaint had taken insurance for any unsaid, unpredictable and uncontrollable event. The fire accident is an unpredictable, uncontrollable even occurred, for which the claim amount of the policy insured by the insurance company should be honoured. The OP admits to the fact that the complainant has taken an insurance policy from them which is valid from 13.09.2020 to 12.09.2021. The accident occurred well within the policy term period. The OP has failed to produce any evidence and has also failed to pay the claim amount of the complainant which shows deficiency in service and Unfair Trade Practice by the OP No.1. Hence the OP No.1 is directed to pay the amount insured to the complainant i.e. Rs.1,48,244/- of the I.D.V and OP No.2 has not appeared before the commission in his contention and hence is liable to pay compensation. Hence OP No.1 & 2 both are liable to pay compensation of Rs.20,000/- towards mental agony and Rs.5,000/- litigation charges. Hence we answer Point No.1&2 accordingly.

12. Point No.3:- In view of the discussion referred above, we proceed to pass the following:-

                                   ORDER

1. Complaint filed by the complainant U/S 35 of Consumer Protection Act, is hereby allowed in part.
2. The OP No.1 is directed to pay the insured amount of Rs.1,48,244/- of I.D.V within 30 days from the date of order.
3. The OPs are jointly and severally is directed to pay Rs.20,000/- compensation towards mental agony and Rs.5,000/- towards litigation cost.
4. The OPs are directed to pay the total award amount within 30 days failing which will have to pay 10% interest on the total award amount from the date of order till realization.
5. Furnish the copies to both the parties without cost.

(Dictated to the Stenographer, got it transcribed and corrected, pronounced in the Open Commission on this 15^th day of DECEMBER, 2023)

Documents produced by the Complainant-P.W.1 are as follows:

Documents produced by the representative of opposite party – R.W.1;