Punjab

Patiala

CC/19/272

Paramjit Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

National Insurance co. - Opp.Party(s)

Sh Navdeep Singh

08 May 2023

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

PATIALA.

 

                                     

Consumer Complaint No.	:	CC/ 272/2019
Date of Institution	:	23.7.2019
Date of Decision	:	8.5.2023

 

Paramjit Singh aged about 41 years son of Shri Bhayan Singh, resident of VPO Kullaran Tehsil Samana District Patiala.

 

                                                                   …………...Complainant

                                      Versus

1. National Insurance Co. Branch Office near Truck Union, Ghagga Road, Samana Tehsil  Samana District Patiala through its Branch Manager.
2. National Insurance Co. Ludhiana Regional Office 4^th Floor, Grand Walk Mall, Ferozepur Road, Ludhiana through its Regional Manager.
3. National Insurance Co. Leela Bhawan Complex, Patiala through its Divisional Manager.

                                                                   …………Opposite Parties

 

Complaint under the Consumer Protection Act

 

QUORUM

                                      Hon’ble Mr.S.K.Aggarwal, President

                                      Hon’ble Mr.G.S.Nagi,Member         

 

 

PRESENT:                   Sh. Jagdeep Singh, counsel for complainant.

                             Sh.Alok Mathur, counsel for OPs.

         

                              

 

                                     

 ORDER                                          

1. The instant complaint is filed by Paramjit Singh (hereinafter referred to as the complainant) against National Insurance Co. (hereinafter referred to as the OP/s) under the Consumer Protection Act (for short the Act).
2. The averments of the complainant are as follows:
3. That complainant is owner of truck No.PB 11-BU-8298 Model 2015 TATA-M having engine No.257511 chassis No.07842. Same was insured with the OPs vide policy No. 401408311710000473 w.e.f. 29. 11. 2017 to mid night 28.11.2018. Wife of complainant namely Karamjit Kaur is the nominee of the complainant.
4. It is alleged that on 20.2.2018 complainant loaded his truck with steel pipes   from Gobindgarh Punjab for unloading the same at Mahuva of Gujarat State. Gulzar Singh s/o Thakar Singh was the driver of the truck. On 23.2.2018 truck was unloaded   at GIDC Mahuva. Again after loading the truck with 350 bags of onions from yard of Patel Munabai Trader Mahuva Gujarat for Panipat, Haryana, complainant parked the said truck at the backside of Mahuva Marketing Yard .
5. When truck was started in the morning electric short circuit took place and caught fire as a result of which truck alongwith bags of onion got burnt and spoiled. Somebody talked telephonically to the Fire Brigade of Mahuva Nagar Palika. The public at large also helped in that process. At last fire got under some control but the truck in question got badly burnt/damaged. Cabin body and engine were totally damaged. Complainant lodged FIR on 23.2.2018 at Mahuva Police Station. Mr.M.N.Barot ASI recorded the report which was witnessed by Ashok Lalubhai Mehta and Hareshabai Babubhai Joshi, police of P.S.Mahuva. Said vehicle with the help of crane was brought back to Patran. An amount of Rs.5,23,965/- was spent in getting the vehicle repaired.
6. All the relevant documents were submitted with the office of OP No.1 for claim but of no avail. The OPs  wrongly & illegally flatly refused to accede to the request of complainant. Consequently, prayer has been made for acceptance of complaint.
7. Upon notice, OPs appeared through counsel and filed written statement having contested the complaint by raising certain preliminary objections.
8. On merits, admitted facts are that an insurance policy was issued by OPs in the name of complainant for the period 29.11.2017 to midnight 28.11.2018.
9. It is alleged that due to non submission of required documents, competent authority of OPs closed the file of the complainant as “No claim” and complainant was duly intimated.
10. It is submitted that on receipt of intimation competent authority of OPs deputed Sh.Atul Vaghela, Surveyor and Loss assessor Bhavnagar for spot survey of the vehicle, who submitted his spot survey report dated 20.3.2018.After that Er.Vinod Kumar Sharma, Surveyor and loss assessor was deputed  to survey the vehicle and he submitted motor survey report dated 2.6.2018. Thereafter, OPs sent a registered letters dated 8.10.2018 , 23.10.2018 and 13.11.2018 to the complainant for submission of valid fitness certificate of the vehicle and valid basic National Permit with authorization but the complainant failed to respond to these letters and finally vide letter dated 26.11.2018 competent authority of the OPs closed the file of the complainant as no claim. After denying all other averments, OPs prayed for dismissal of complaint.
11. In order to prove the case ld. counsel for complainant tendered in evidence Ex.CA affidavit of the complainant alongwith documents, Ex.C1 copy of policy,Ex.C2 copy of Driving licence of Gulzar Singh, Ex.C3 copy of RC of the truck, Exs.C4 to C18,copies of bills,Ex.C19 copy of permit, Ex.C20 copy of panchnama,Ex.C21 copy of police report,Ex.C22 copy of forensic report, Ex.C23 copy of letter  issued by Mahuva Market Committee, Ex.C24 copy of letter issued by Nagar Palika Mahuva,Ex.C25 copy of receipt of crane,Ex.C26 copy of translation  of panchnama,Ex.C27 copy of translation of police report,Ex.C28 copy of fitness certificate and closed evidence.
12. On the other hand, ld. counsel for the OPs tendered in evidence, Ex.OPA affidavit of Atul Vaghela, Surveyor and Loss Assessor, Ex.OPB affidavit of Er.Vinod Kumar Sharma, surveyor and loss assessor, Ex.OPC affidavit of Balwinder Singh, AO Samana, NIC, Ex.OP1 copy of report of Atul Vaghela, Ex.OP2 copy of report of Er.Vinod Kumar Sharma,Ex.OP3  to Ex.OP6 copies of letters dated 8.10.2018, 23.10.2018 and 26.11.2018 ,Ex.OP7 copy of insurance policy, Ex.OP8 copy of terms and conditions,Ex.OP9 to OP11 copies of postal receipts and closed evidence.
13. We have heard ld. counsel for the parties and have also gone through the record of the case, carefully.
14. Admittedly, the complainant is owner of the truck bearing registration No.PB 11-BU-8298 which was fully insured with the OPs vide policy No.401408311710000473 valid from 29.11.2017 to 28.11.2018, copy of which is Ex.C1.As per the complainant he loaded the truck with the steel pipes for onward journey to Mahuva in Gujarat State on 20.2.2018.After unloading the pipes the truck was loaded again with onions on 23.2.2018 for onward journey from Mahuva  to Panipat (Haryana) and parked the same in the yard of Patel Munabai Trader. In the morning when the ignition was started the truck caught fire. The truck got badly burnt/damaged in the said fire and an FIR, Ex.C22, was lodged in the police station Mahuva. The truck was brought back to Patran and got repaired as per the bills,Exs.C4 to C18.The claim was lodged with the OPs alongwith insurance certificate,ExC28, which was valid upto 2.4.2019.The complainant has alleged that claim was not settled inspite or repeated requests made by him.
15. The OPs in their written statement have agreed to the fact that the vehicle was insured and caught fire at Mahuva Gujarat. The OPs produced on record copy of spot survey report dated 20.3.2018 conducted by Atul Vaghela,Ex.OP1 wherein the remarks that R.C.Book, Driving licence, Permit, Fitness and RTO tax receipt are not available for verification and  may be verified at your end were added. Another survey report prepared by Er.Vinod Kumar Sharma, Ex.OP2 dated 2.6.2018 has also been produced by the OPs as per which RC and Driving Licence produced by the complainant were checked and found in order and assessment of loss was also made. The complainant was then asked to produce vehicle fitness certificate and valid National Permit, as per letters dated 8.10.2018,Ex.OP3, 23.10.2018,Ex.OP4, 13.11.2018,Ex.OP5 and 26.11.2018,Ex.OP6. Ld. counsel for the OPs has argued that the fitness certificate produced by the complainant as per which the vehicle was fit for operation till 2.4.2019 was got verified by the OPs from the Motor Vehicle Inspector, Fatehgarh Sahib, wherein it has been stated that the vehicle was fit to operate from 3.4.2018 to 2.4.2019.Ld. counsel for the OPs has  argued that the complainant failed to produce valid fitness certificate as on the date of fire in spite of repeated letters having been issued to him. (whereas the incident  of fire had taken place in Mahauva Gujarat on 23.2.2018 and the complainant was not having fitness certificate of the vehicle at the time of incident of fire).
16.  Ld. counsel for the OPs has relied upon the judgment of Hon’ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in Revision Petition No.2976 of 2006 titled as United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Trilok Kaushik IV(2010) CPJ 321 (NC), wherein it has been held that as the vehicle was not carrying a valid document (fitness certificate) as such there was breach of fundamental conditions of the policy by the complainant and the complainant is not entitled to any compensation.
17. Section 42 of the Motor Vehicles Act,1939 deals with the necessity of permits, which reads as under:

“42. Necessity for permits-(1) No owner of, a transport vehicle shall, use or permit the use of the vehicle in any public place or not such vehicle is actually carrying any passenger or goods in accordance with the conditions of a permit granted or countersigned by a Regional or State Transport Authority [or the Commission] authorizing the use of the vehicle in that place in the manner in which the vehicle is being used.”

18. From the above, it is clear that no transport vehicle can be used at any public place without a valid permit. In other words, a transport vehicle without a valid permit cannot be plied on the road and for violation of the said provision, there is penal liability under Section 123 of the Motor Vehicle Act.
19. Section 38 of the Motor Vehicle Act, deals with certificate of the fitness of the transport vehicles which reads as under:

“38. Certificate of fitness of transport vehicles-(1) Subject to the provisions of Section 39, a transport vehicle shall not be deemed to be validly registered for the purposes of Section 22, unless it carried a certificate of fitness in Form H as set forth in the First Schedule, issued by the prescribed authority, to the effect that the vehicle complies for the time being with all the requirements of Chapter V and the rules made there under. Where the prescribed authority refuses to issue such certificate, it shall supply the owner of the vehicle with its reasons in writing for such refusal.

20. From the above, it is clear that a transport vehicle shall not be deemed to be validly registered for the purpose of Section 22 of the Motor Vehicles Act, unless it carries a certificate of fitness. The vehicle in question did not have a fitness certificate on the date of the accident and as such the vehicle in question is deemed to be not validly registered.
21. In view of the above, we are of the opinion that there is breach of fundamental conditions on the part of the complainant at the time when the incident of fire took place at a place Mahuva in Gujarat. The complainant was not authorized to drive the vehicle on road in the absence of valid fitness certificate, as discussed above. However, the complainant transversed a long distance from Punjab to Mahuva Gujarat and again loaded truck in reverse journey from Mahuva  Gujarat  to Punjab without any valid fitness certificate. Admittedly, as per the version of the complainant the vehicle caught fire only when the ignition was started for taking the vehicle on road and not due to outbreak of fire in the godown or from any external source. Thus, tuning on off the ignition for taking the truck on road for onward journey from Mahuva Gujarat to Panipant is fundamental breach of the conditions of the agreement of insurance between the complainant and the opposite parties. As such, we are of the opinion that complainant is not entitled to any relief and the complaint is dismissed accordingly. Parties are to bear their own costs.  
22.           The instant complaint could not be disposed of within stipulated period due to Covid protocol and for want of Quorum from long time.
85109252238716.  
85109252238717.  

                                              G.S.Nagi                           S.K.AGGARWAL

                                              Member                          President