Orissa

Jagatsinghapur

CC/144/2021

Mamata Pradhan - Complainant(s)

Versus

National Insurance Co.Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Mr.N.C.Barik

23 Aug 2022

ORDER

                                                                                       JUDGMENT

 

            Complainant has filed this consumer complaint U/s.35 of C.P. Act, 2019 seeking the following reliefs:

            “Direct the opposite parties to pay the cost of the damage and mental agony and compensation with interest”.

            The brief fact of the case of the complainant is that she insured her vehicle bearing No.OR-05-B-5155 under the opposite parties vide policy No.163102311910003333 which was valid till 28.6.2025. The vehicle met with an accident on 23.6.2020 and the complainant put forth her claim before the opposite parties and the opposite parties deputed a surveyor and the surveyor after survey submitted his report but the claim application of the complainant has not been complied. The complainant met the Manager, (O.P. No.1) for settlement of her claim but without settling the claim sent a letter to the complainant stating therein that the vehicle violated Sec.66 of M.V. Act.

            The opposite parties filed their written version and stated that, the opposite parties issued a goods carrying vehicle package policy in favour of complainant covering the risk of her Tanker bearing Regd. No.OD-05-B-5155 which was valid from 30.01.2020 to 29.01.2021 subject to certain terms and conditions of the insurance policy. The husband of the complainant Pramod Pradhan lodged the claim with the opposite party No.1 on 24.6.2020 alleging therein that the above noted Tanker which was loaded and was going to Jharsuguda on the way met with an accident and has suffered damages. The opposite parties deputed the duly license surveyor for spot survey. The surveyor after having physical inspection of the vehicle taken the photographs and submitted his spot survey report on 08.7.2020. The surveyor submitted his final survey and assessment report on 07.02.2021 with net assessment of loss as Rs.1,45,000/-. After receipt of final surveyor report the opposite parties process the claim file of the complainant and found that the permit of the Tanker was valid till 07.3.2018 and thereafter the same was renewed on 29.6.2020 which clearly establishes the fact that the vehicle of the complainant insured by the opposite parties was playing without a valid permit at the material time of accident i.e. on 23.6.2020 and was plying in gross contravention of Section-66 of the M.V. Act as well as in gross violation of the policy condition for which the claim of the complainant was repudiated and the fact of repudiation was communicated to the complainant vide Regd. Post with A.D. letter dtd.12.3.2021.

            Contention of opposite parties for repudiating the claim is that during the currency of policy when the vehicle met with an accident on 23.6.2020. The permit contending to concerned vehicle OR-05-B-5155 with permit No.GC/PP/05/1696/12/13 had validity from 08.3.2013 to 07.3.2018 and then renewed from 29.6.2020 to 28.6.2025. The accident took place on 23.6.2020 as such the vehicle did not possess valid permit, which violates Sec.66 of M.V. Act, which read as follows; “No owner of a motor vehicle shall use or permit the use of the vehicle as a transport vehicle in any public place whether or not such vehicle is actually carrying any passengers or goods save in accordance with the conditions of a permit granted or countersigned by a Regional or State Transport Authority or any prescribed authority authorizing him the use of the vehicle in that place in the manner in which the vehicle is being used.”

            The complainant has not disputed the said fact and has not filed any document to prove that he was having valid permit. The counsel for complainant has filed two and half pages of part of judgment in the case of Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. vrs. Sona & others relating to a case of insurance fixing the liability from whom the amount is recovered where the driver who drives a vehicle without fitness certificate or road permit as well as the owner who permits the vehicle has given as such. The judgment cited by the complainant has no relevance the facts and circumstances of the case. The vehicle has met with an accident during currency of policy is not in dispute but the vehicle has not any valid permit as on date of accident i.e. 23.6.2020 is not disputed by the complainant. Since the vehicle met with an accident and sustained the loss in business as well as damages, mearly because the vehicle has no permit cannot be a ground to reject the entire claim of complainant in toto. 

            Considering the facts and circumstances of the case we direct the opposite parties to finalize the claim of the complainant on non standard basis and the complainant shall file a claim before the opposite parties afresh. The opposite parties shall consider the claim on non standard basis within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of claim. With the aforesaid observation and direction the consumer complaint is disposed of. No cost.   

           

            Pronounced in the open Commission on this 23^rd August, 2022.