Haryana

Yamunanagar

CC/361/2012

Sant Kumar Bhardwaj S/o Ravi Dutt Sharma - Complainant(s)

Versus

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

D.S.Kamboj

20 Dec 2016

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, YAMUNA NAGAR

 

                                                                                Complaint No. 361 of 2012.

                                                                                Date of institution: 09.04.2012

                                                                                Date of decision: 20.12.2016.

Sant Kumar Bhardwaj aged about 40 years son of Sh. Ravi Dutt Sharma resident of H. No. 347, Urban Estate, Sector15, HUDA, Jagadhri.   

                                                                                                         

                                                                                                                                              …Complainant.

                                    Versus

National Insurance Company Ltd. Near New Fountain Chowk, Yamuna Nagar through its Branch Manager.                                                                                                                                                                                                                     

                                                                                                                                                 …Respondent.

BEFORE:         SH. ASHOK KUMAR GARG…………….. PRESIDENT.

                         SH. S.C.SHARMA………………………….MEMBER.

 

Present:  Sh. D.S.Kamboj, Advocate, counsel for complainant.  

                Sh. Parmod Gupta, Advocate, counsel for respondent.        

             

ORDER

 

1.                     Complainant has filed the present complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act. 1986.

2.                     Brief facts of the complaint, as alleged by the complainant, are that complainant had purchased a Maruti Swift car bearing registration No. HR-02V-2425 which was insured with the OP Insurance Company vide insurance cover note No. 70537891 valid from 23.09.2009 to 22.09.2010 and the same met with an accident on 22.12.2009. The complainant got repaired the same from the Hira Motors, Yamuna Nagar and after that he submitted all the requisite documents of the car in question on 26.12.2009 to get the claim of Rs. 13,295/- with the OP Insurance Company but his claim was repudiated by the OP Insurance Company vide its letter dated 30.04.2010 by stating therein that complainant has availed 50% NCB on two vehicles whereas as per guidelines of the NCB, the complainant was entitled to get NCB on one vehicle only. It has been further mentioned that complainant was owner of Maruti Car 800 bearing registration No. HR-02E-8080 which was insured with the New India Assurance Company Limited, Yamuna Nagar vide policy bearing No. 35350331080100004462 valid w.e.f. 23.03.2009 to 21.03.2010. At the time of purchase of new car, the complainant submitted all the documents required by the Ops and when the complainant contacted the New India Assurance Company Ltd. Office Yamuna Nagar, the complainant was shocked to know that policy was not cancelled by the authorized agent of Pandit Automobiles, Yamuna Nagar. On this, the complainant again submitted an application for cancellation of the policy of the old vehicle which was cancelled by the company on 24.12.2009 and the claim of the complainant was rejected after a gap of 4 months on dated 30.04.2010 on the ground that complainant is enjoying NCB on both the vehicles whereas complainant got insured his old vehicle on dated 23.09.2009 after adjusting 50% NCB then how the complainant can enjoy 50% NCB on both the vehicles. The OP Insurance Company kept the case of the complainant pending for such a long time. Furthermore, it has been mentioned that the authorized insurance agent of the Pandit Automobile has not cancelled the old policy despite taking the old policy and request letter from the complainant at the time of purchase of new car. Lastly, prayed for directing the OP Insurance Company to pay a sum of Rs. 13,295/- on account of accident of vehicle as the claim of the complainant has been wrongly repudiated vide letter dated 30.04.2010. Hence, this complaint.

3.                     Upon notice, OP Insurance Company appeared and filed its written statement by taking some preliminary objections such as complicated question of law and facts is involved and the complaint cannot be decided in summarily manner; complaint is bad for non joinder and mis joinder of necessary parties; complainant has no locus standi; complainant is estopped from filing the present complaint by his own act and conduct; complainant has not come to this Forum with clean hands and on merit it has been mentioned that as per documents supplied by the complainant one swift VDI is insured with the Op National Insurance Company Connaught Place, New Delhi valid from 23.09.2009 to 22.09.2010 and the complainant procured a No Claim Bonus of 50% on the said policy by suppressing the material facts that  No Claim Bonus transferred on his new car by saying that he has got the earlier policy of his second vehicle cancelled which was running on 50% No Claim Bonus. Further, it has been admitted that on intimation of the complainant intimated the National Insurance Company that his vehicle met with an accident on 22.12.2009 at Kamani Chowk, Yamuna Nagar. The claim form was filled and immediately independent surveyor Sh. Ashok Kumar Sood was deputed to assess the loss who submitted his report dated 28.12.2009 by assessing the loss of Rs. 13295.70 subject to terms and conditions of the insurance policy. As per terms and conditions of the policy and on perusal of the papers submitted by the complainant it was observed that complainant was availing 50% NCB on his previous car as well as on new car. Hence, his claim was rightly repudiated by the OP Insurance Company. Rest contents of the complaint were denied. Lastly, prayed for dismissal of complaint.

4.                     In support of his case, counsel for the complainant tendered into evidence affidavit of complainant as Annexure CW/A and documents such as Photo copy of RC as Annexure C-1, Photo copy of certificate cum policy schedule as Annexure C-2, Photo copy of claim repudiation letter dated 30.04.2010 as Annex. C-3 and closed the evidence on behalf of complainant.

5.                     On the other hand, counsel for the OP tendered into evidence affidavit of Sh. Parveen Arora, Administrative Officer as Annexure RW/A and affidavit of Sh. Ashok Kumar Sood, Surveyor and Loss Assessor as Annexure RW/B and documents such as Photo copy of Insurance Policy as Annexure R-1, Photo copy of GR.27 No Claim Bonus of Motor Vehicle Tariff Rules as Annexure R-2, Photo copy of India Motor Tariff as Annexure R-3, Photo copy of claim repudiation letter dated 30.04.2010 as Annexure R-4, Photo copy of declaration by insured as Annexure R-5, Photo copy of No Claim Bonus Certificate  issued by New India Assurance Company as Annexure R-6, Photo copy of previous insurance policy as Annexure R-7 and R-8 issued by New India Assurance Company, Photo copy of report of Sh. Ashok Kumar Sood dated 28.12.2009 as Annexure R-9 and closed the evidence on behalf of OP.

6.                     We have heard the learned counsel for both the parties and have gone through the pleadings as well as documents placed on the file carefully and minutely.

7.                      It is not disputed that complainant got insured his Swift car bearing registration No. HR-02V-2425 with the OP Insurance Company vide insurance policy bearing No. 70537891 valid from 23.09.2009 to 22.09.2010 for a sum of Rs. 4,78,026/- which is duly evident from the copy of insurance policy Annexure C-2. It is also not disputed that complainant has obtained NCB amounting to Rs. 6102/- at the time of getting insurance policy from the OP Insurance Company. It is also not disputed that the swift ZDI car in question met with an accident on 22.12.2009 and on intimation surveyor and loss assessor was deputed by OP Insurance Company who submitted his report by assessing the amount of Rs. 13295.70/- which is duly evident from the copy of surveyor report Annexure R-9.

 8.                    The only plea of the complainant is that his genuine claim has been wrongly and illegally repudiated by the OP Insurance Company on the flimsy ground as the complainant never got any claim on his another vehicle i.e. Maruti Car 800 bearing registration No. HR-02E-8080 which was insured with the. New India Assurance Company. Learned counsel for the complainant argued that the OP Company has wrongly repudiated the claim of the complainant and the complainant is entitled for amount spent on the repair of the car. Learned counsel for the complainant referred the case law titled as UII Versus Et. Travaids Private Ltd. 2016(3) CLT pae 604 NC. 

9.                     On the other hand, learned counsel for the OP argued at length that claim of the complainant has been rightly repudiated by the OP No.1 Insurance Company vide its letter dated 30.04.2010 (Annexure C-3/R-4) on the ground that the complainant was also availing NCB of 50% on another vehicle car bearing registration No. HR-02-E-8080 under policy No. 353503/31/08/01/00004462 upto 24.12.2009 and the said policy was cancelled on 24.12.2009 and the complainant continued to enjoy 50% NCB on two vehicles. Learned counsel for the OP further argued that if the Forum comes to the conclusion that complainant is entitled to get any claim then he is only entitled to get Rs. 13,295/- as this amount has been assessed by the surveyor and loss assessor vide his report dated 28.12.2009 Annexure R-9. Learned counsel for OP further draw our attention towards the photo copy of GR.27 (No Claim Bonus) of the Motor Vehicle Tariff Rules. Lastly, prayed for dismissal of complaint.

10.                   After hearing both the parties, we are of the considered view that there is a deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of OP and the claim of the complainant has been wrongly repudiated by the Op Insurance Company. We have perused the G.R.27 of the Motor Tariff wherein also it has nowhere been mentioned that complainant is not entitled to get the claim if the complainant was availing 50% NCB on his previous car as well as on new car. According to the authority produced by the complainant, as per GR 27, the Insurance Company was under obligation to write to the previous insurer within 21 days after getting insurance cover to confirm whether the complainant was entitled to grant of NCB. The OP Insurance Company failed to prove on file that they have written to the previous insurer within 21 days after the issuance of cover note in question. When the OP Company has not complied with the GR 27 condition, then they have no right to repudiate the claim of the complainant on the ground of No Claim Bonus. The authority submitted by the complainant is fully applicable to the facts of the instant case. Even otherwise also, it is not the case of the OP Insurance Company that complainant had availed any claim under the previous insurance policy and from the previous insurance company. it is settled law that No Claim Bonus is always given to the owner not to the vehicle. In the present case, the complainant purchased the new vehicle in exchange by giving his old Maruti car 800 from the Pandit Automobile but the official of the Pandit Automobile could not cancel the insurance policy despite the request of the complainant in time which was later on cancelled on 24.12.2009. Hence, due to the fault of the official of the Pandit Automobile why the complainant should suffer. As such, we are of the considered view that OP Insurance Company has wrongly repudiated the claim of the complainant. As such, the complainant is entitled for relief.                     

11.                   Resultantly, we partly allow the complaint of complainant and direct the OP Insurance Company to pay a sum of Rs. 13,295/- to the complainant alongwith interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of filing of complaint till its realization and further to pay Rs. 2,000/- as compensation for mental agony, harassment as well as litigation expenses. Order be complied within 30 days after preparation of copy of this order failing which complainant shall be entitled to invoke the jurisdiction of this Forum as per law.  Copies of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of costs as per rules. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced in open court: 20.12.2016.          

                                                                                    (ASHOK KUMAR GARG )

                                                                                    PRESIDENT,                          

                        (S.C.SHARMA )                                DCDRF, YAMUNANAGAR

                         MEMBER.