Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rohtak.
Complaint No. : 21.
Instituted on : 10.01.2020
Decided on : 29.05.2024
Rohit, age 34 years, s/o Inder Singh R/o House no.829, Bhaproda , Tehsil Bahadurgarh, District Jhajjar(Haryana)-124507, Mobile No.9253445122.
………..Complainant.
Vs.
- National Insurance Company Ltd. Registered and Head office 3 Middleton Street Kolkata-700071.
- Sh.Santosh Kumar Singh Direct agents Branch XXV First Fllor, C9, Central Market Lajpat Nagar II, New Delhi-110024.
- Jagmohan Motors Sonepat Road, Rohtak District Rohtak.
…….Opposite parties.
COMPLAINT U/S 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1988
BEFORE: SH.NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT.
DR. TRIPTI PANNU, MEMBER.
DR.VIJENDER SINGH, MEMBER.
Present: Sh.R.S.Dhankhar, Advocate for the complainant.
Sh.A.S.Malik, Advocate for the opposite party No.1.
Ms. Lovina Singla, Advocate for opposite party No.3.
Opposite party No.2 already exparte.
ORDER
NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN PRESIDENT:
1. Brief facts of the case, as per the complainant are that he is registered owner of a vehicle Maruti Car Ciaz Alpha bearing registration No.HR-13M-0854 and the same was fully insured with the respondents vide policy No.3548043121810001376 and paid the premium of Rs.21500/-. The car of the complainant met with an accident on 02.03.2019 and 15.03.2019. Complainant repaired the vehicle from Jagmohan Motors Rohtak and repairing charges of Rs.17865/- dated 06.03.2019 and Rs.29616/- dated 27.03.2019 were paid to the opposite party No.3. Complainant contacted the opposite party no.2 to get the above claim of Rs.47481/- but they did not pay any heed to the request of complainant. The complainant got policy no.42160031191144104929 of respondent i.e. insurance company through sourced and serviced by Maruti Insurance Broking Pvt. ltd. for the year 24.08.2019 to 23.08.2020. Complainant repeatedly requested the opposite parties to give the insurance claim and also served a legal notice but to no effect. Hence this complaint and it is prayed that opposite parties may kindly be directed to pay a sum of Rs.47481/- alongwith interest @ 18% p.a. from the date of filing the present complaint till the date of actual realisation and also to pay Rs.50000/- for causing unnecessary harassment and Rs.22,000/- as litigation expenses etc. to the complainant.
2. After registration of complaint, notice was issued to the opposite party. Opposite party No.1 in its reply has submitted that complainant misrepresented the fact that No.Claim(OD) was obtained by him on insured vehicle in previous policy year from Bajaj Allianz GIC Ltd. The complainant obtained insurance policy from opposite party No.1, taking 20% rebate of NCB(No Claim Benefit ) under previous policy on false presentation. As per the confirmation sought from Bajaj Allianz GIC ltd. complaint was not eligible for NCB but he had claimed NCB discount of 20% on declaration. “As per policy contract any declaration made by insured, if found incorrect all benefits under the policy in respect of the Section-1 of the policy will stand forfeited”. The opposite party no.1 has written a letter dated 31.07.2019 to clarify with evidence, if any countering the points, reasons stated above, within next seven days. But no response was received from the complainant. As such the claim of the complainant was repudiated by the company vide its letter dated 09.08.2019. All the other contents of the complaint were stated to be wrong and denied and opposite parties prayed for dismissal of complaint with costs.
3. Opposite party No.3 in its reply has submitted that it is admitted to the extent that the complainant paid an amount of rs.47481/- to the opposite party as part of the repair of the vehicle. Para no.3 to 7 are related to the opposite party No.1 & 2 and respondent no.3 has no concern with the same. The other contents of the complaint were legal in nature. Opposite party No.3 prayed for dismissal of complaint with costs. Notice sent to opposite party no.2 was received back served but none appeared on behalf of opposite party No.2 and opposite party no.2 was proceeded against exparte vide order dated 15.12.2021 of this Commission.
4. Ld. Counsel for the complainant in his evidence has tendered affidavit Ex.PW1/A, documents Ex.P1 to Ex.P9 and has closed his evidence on dated 13.12.2022. Ld. counsel for the opposite party no.1 tendered affidavit Ex.RW1/A, document Ex.R1 to Ex.R8 and closed his evidence on dated 02.11.2023. Ld. counsel for the opposite party no.3 has tendered affidavit Ex.RW3/A and closed his evidence on dated 12.06.2023.
5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through material aspects of the case very carefully.
6. We have perused the documents placed on record by both the parties. In the present case claim of the complainant has been repudiated by the insurance company as ‘No claim’ on the ground that the complainant obtained OD claim on previous insurance company i.e. from Bajaj Allianz Insurance Co. The complainant obtained NOC rebate of 20% (No Claim Bonus) in the present policy. So a false declaration and presentation has been made by the complainant at the time of issuance of the policy. So the claim of the complainant has been repudiated as no claim vide letter dated 09.08.2019 on the above mentioned ground. It has been further submitted that the respondent insurance company no.1 wrote a letter to Bajaj Allianz Insurance Company limited on 31.07.2019 and it has been clarified that the complainant has taken an OD Claim on the previous insurance policy. We have minutely perused the documents placed on record by both the parties. In fact the previous insurance policy was for the period 27.07.2017 to 26.07.2018 and thereafter the respondent no.1 issued the policy for the period 24.04.2018 to 23.08.2019. The complainant through this complaint demanded a claim of Rs.47481/-. It has been pleaded in the complaint that the complainant’s vehicle met with an accident on 02.03.2019 and 15.03.2019 but in fact the accident had taken place on dated 26.02.2019 and on dated 24.03.2019. The insurance company deputed two surveyors in two different accidents. Sh. Ajmer Ahlawat Surveyor has submitted his report with the insurance company i.e. respondent no.1 on dated 11.03.2019 and assessed the loss in the vehicle in question as Rs.12811/- which is proved from the survey report Ex.R7 for the accident occurred on 26.02.2019. An another survey report Ex.R8 is also placed on record for the date of accident 24.03.2019 whereas the complainant has wrongly mentioned the date of accident as 15.03.2019 and assessed the loss of Rs.29661/-. As per proposal form Ex.R2, complainant had availed the benefit of 20% NCB from the opposite party No.1. As per our opinion the previous policy period was 27.07.2017 to 26.07.2018 and the National insurance company issued the policy w.e.f. 24.08.2018 to 23.08.2019. Previous policy was lapsed on 26.07.2022 and second policy was started on 24.08.2018. There is a gap of approximately one month in issuance of second policy. As per our opinion in fact it is the prime duty of the insurance company to confirm the declaration made by the complainant regarding the insurance claim from the previous insurer and after that they should give the benefit of NCB to the complainant. But the same has not been done by the opposite party No.1.
7. From the documents placed on record by both the parties it is observed that no doubt the complainant has taken the benefit of NCB but as per tax invoice Ex.P6 & Ex.P5 he has spent an amount of Rs.17865/- and Rs.29616/- respectively on the repair of his vehicle. In this regard, we have placed reliance upon the law of Hon’ble National Commission, New Delhi in Revision Petition No.19836 of 2016 titled as National Insurance Co. Vs. Naresh Kumar whereby Hon’ble National Commission, New Delhi has submitted that: “In cases of the insured taking the insurance policy of the vehicle from new insurance company and it is established that the insured by making wrongful declaration has taken benefit of No Claim Bonus, his insurance claim would be reduced proportionately” and Hon’ble Punjab State Commission, Chandigarh in IV(2009)CPJ 365 titled Gurdeep Kaur Vs. National Insurance Co. Ltd. has also held that: “If any amount claimed by complainant during subsistence of earlier insurance policy, then same to be deducted from present insurance claim-Repudiation of entire claim only on the ground of false statement of NCB highly unjustified”. In view of the aforesaid law which are fully applicable on the facts and circumstances it is observed that the repudiation of whole claim by the opposite party No.1 on the ground of availing the benefit of NCB is illegal and as such complainant is entitled for the claim amount after deducting the proportionate amount of 20% claim. Hence he is entitled for Rs.37985/-(Rs.47481/- less Rs.9496/-(20%).
8. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, we hereby allow the complaint and direct the opposite party No.1 to pay the claim amount of Rs. 37985/-(Rupees thirty seven thousand nine hundred and eighty five only) alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing the present complaint i.e.10.01.2020 till its realization and shall also pay a sum of Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand only) as compensation on account of deficiency in service as well as litigation expenses to the complainant within one month from the date of decision.
9. Copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced in open court:
29.05.2024.
........................................................
Nagender Singh Kadian, President
..........................................
Tripti Pannu, Member.
.........................................
Vijender Singh, Member.
