Complainants Hitesh Bhandari and other through the present complaint has sought the necessary directions to the opposite parties to pay claim amount of Rs.2,36,250/- alongwith interest @ 12% P.A.. Opposite parties be further directed to pay Rs.50,000/-as damages and Rs.22,000/- as litigation expenses, in the interest of justice.
2. The case of the complainant in brief is that Sh.Krishan Lal Bhandari son of Sh.Hari Krishan Bhandari resident of Old Grain Market Batala got insured his TATA Indica Car bearing registration No.PB-18Q-3406 bearing Chassis No.77093 and Engine no.0038998 Model 2009 with the opposite parties for the period from 26.11.2014 to 25.11.2015 vide policy No.401211/311/14/6100004478. He also got insured his Honda Activa Scooter bearing registration No.PB-18S-4131 for the period from 14.3.2015 to 13.03.2016 vide policy No.401211/31/14/6200006549 with the opposite parties. Unfortunately, Sh.Krishan Lal Bhandari died on 07.06.2012 leaving behind the complainants as his legal heirs and successors on the basis of his last, legal, valid and registered WILL dated 14.7.2009. After the death Sh.Krishan Lal Bhandari he succeeded his estate including the Car and Scooter. Since the complainant no.2 is a minor and the abovesaid vehicles i.e. the insured Car and Scooter could not transferred in his name. It was further pleaded that the Indica Car referred above also met with an accident on 12.7.2010 regarding which an FIR No.88 was registered with P.S.Kartarpur and the said car was impounded by the police and was released on Sapurdari and thus the car could not be transfer otherwise also in the name of the complainants. Unfortunately, the Car and Scooter alongwith other vehicles were got destroyed in a fire on 18.08.2015. The matter was reported to the opposite parties as well as to the Police P.S.City Batala vide FIR No.102 dated 1.10.2015 after thorough investigation but the opposite parties repudiated their claim relating to the Car and Scooter vide letter dated 14.1.2016. Even after the expiry of Sh.Krishan Lal Bhandari the insurance policies used to be renewed and reissued in the name of deceased Sh.Krishan Lal Bhandari. Thus the opposite parties were bound to make the payment of the claim of the insurance policy to the complainants. Thus, there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. Hence this complaint.
3. Upon notice, the opposite party appeared and filed its written version through its counsel, taking the preliminary objection that the complaint filed by the complainant is not maintainable; the complaint is without any cause of action, hence liable to be dismissed and the complaint is absolutely false and frivolous. On merits, it was submitted that claim of the complainants repudiated regarding the car vide letter dated 14.1.2016 and regarding the scooter vide letter of the even dated 14.1.2016. The claim of the complainants have been repudiated by the opposite parties on the ground the insured vehicles were not got transferred in their names after the death of Sh.Krishan Lal Bhandari, the original insurer. The Honda Activa Scooter bearing registration no.PB-18-S-4131 alleged to be insured vide policy No.401211/31/14/6200006549 covering the period of 14.3.2015 to 13.03.2016 and TATA Indica Car bearing registration No.PB-18Q-3406 alleged to be insured vide policy no. No.401211/311/14/6100004478 covering the period of insurance from 26.11.2014 to 25.11.2015 by Mr.Krishan Lal Bhandari son of Sh.Hari Krishan Bhandari resident of Old Grain Market Batala father of complainants. It was admitted by the complainants that Sh.Krishan Lal Bhandari died on 07.06.2012 much before the issuance of alleged insurance policies of Honda Activa Scooter and TATA Indica Car. As per Motor Vehicle Act when the owner of vehicle dies, the person succeeding to the possession of the vehicle may for a period of three months use the vehicle as if it has been transferred to him/them where such person has within a 30 days of the death of the owner inform the registering authority in respect to death of the owner and of his intention to use the vehicle. But in this case nothing of this sort happened. Insurance is a contract between the owner of the vehicle and the insurer but in this case no contract was effected between the insured and insurer as a dead person cannot enter into any contract. Any contract with a dead person is void abnitio. So no insurance cover was issued to the complainants in respect of Honda Activa Scooter and Tata Indica Car. Moreover the complainants have no insurable interest in the vehicle. So the opposite party is not liable to pay any compensation to the complainants. Thus, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. All other averments made in the complaint has been vehemently denied and lastly prayed that the complaint may be dismissed with costs.
4. Counsel for the complainant tendered into evidence affidavit of complainant ExCW1/A along with other documents exhibited as Ex.C1 to Ex C11 and closed the evidence.
5. Sh.Parveen Chadha Manager of opposite party tendered into evidence his own affidavit Ex.OP1 alongwith other documents exhibited as Ex.OP2 to Ex.OP-10 and closed the evidence.
6. We have duly heard the learned counsels for both the sides on the points of law and have also thoroughly examined the documents/evidence as produced on records with the requisite care & caution on the points of fact, in order to determine the points of dispute comprising the present complaint. We find that the OP insurers disallowed the impugned Car Accident & subsequent Fire-Loss (of insured Car & Scooter) Insurance Claim vide its repudiation letter(s) # 743 & 744 both of 14.01.2016 (Ex.C9 & Ex.C10) on account of ‘non-transfer’ of the insured vehicles in the names of the complainants upon the death (Ex.C4) of the registered owner Krishan Lal Bhandari.
7. We find that the insured car and the insured scooter both were registered in the name of Krishan Lal Bhandari who had since expired (Ex.C4) on 07.06.2012 but both the vehicles continued to stay registered and subsequent insurance (Ex.C2 & Ex.C3) continued to be renewed in his name. The complainants have somehow pleaded their ‘minority’ in age and the then owner’s WILL (Ex.C5) to be the prime cause of ‘delay’ in the requisite transfer of vehicles (and insurance) in their name. The other documents Ex.C6 to Ex.C8 & Ex.C11 do support the other pleadings as made out in the present complaint.
8. The OP insurers have however shifted the entire blame of non-transfer of insured vehicles and ‘renewal’ of the insurance policies in the name of the complainants upon them pleading their ignorance but that shall not be acceptable. The OP insurers have failed to produce any cogent evidence to support their above pleading of ignorance of ‘death’ of the insured. It is not understood as to why the related renewal ‘proposals’ of insurance have not been produced to support the same. Under the circumstances, the OP insurers shall not be allowed to take benefits of their own default. The factum of ‘death’ of the insured at the time of ‘renewal’ of insurance policies of the vehicles was very much in the knowledge and notice of the agents/representatives of the insurers and thus they shall be liable to settle the ensuing claims.
9. In the light of the all above, we partly allow the present complaint and thus ORDER the OP insurers to pay both the impugned claims to the full benefits of the related insurance policies to the complainants besides to pay them Rs.3,000/- as compensation for the harassment caused and Rs.2,000/- as cost of litigation within 30 days of the receipt of the copy of the present orders otherwise the aggregate awarded amount shall attract interest @ 9% PA from the date of complaint till actual realization.
10. Copy of the order be communicated to the parties free of charges. After compliance, file be consigned to record.
(Naveen Puri)
President.
ANNOUNCED: (Jagdeep Kaur)
September, 22 2016. Member
*MK*
