Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Rohtak.

                                                                    Complaint No. : 313.

                                                                    Instituted on     : 22.05.2017.

                                                                    Decided on       : 08.04.2019.

Jaswant Singh son of sh. Ramphal r/o village Jakhoda Tehsil Bahadurgarh District Jhajjar.

                                                                    ………..Complainant.

                             Vs.

National Insurance Company Limited, Jawahar Market, D-Park, Delhi Road, Rohtak through its Branch Manager. 

……….Opposite party.

COMPLAINT U/S 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986.

BEFORE:  SH.NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT.

                   SH. VED PAL, MEMBER.

                   DR. RENU CHAUDHARY, MEMBER.

Present:       Sh. Sandeep Kataria, Advocate for the complainant.

                   Sh. Deepak Bhardwaj, Advocate for opposite party.

                                      ORDER

NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT:

1.                          Brief facts of the case are that complainant insured his vehicle bearing no.HR-63B-3107 from the opposite party vide policy no.421600/31/15/6300000850 for a period from 20.05.2015 to 19.05.2016 vide policy no.421600/31/15/6300000850. That the above said vehicle met with an accident and FIR No.93 dated 06.02.2016 was registered in PS Bagpat. That complainant informed the opposite party about the accident and lodged the claim. Complainant submitted all the documents regarding the insurance claim and requested for making the payment of amount of claim but till today, opposite party has not paid any amount to the complainant. That the opposite party vide its letter dated 31.01.2017 has closed the claim as “No Claim” on the false and baseless grounds.  That the act of opposite party is illegal and amounts to deficiency in service. Hence this  complaint and the complainant has prayed for directing the opposite party to pay the claim of Rs.483000/-(Rs.250000/- on account of damages to the vehicle, Rs.100000/- for financial loss, Rs.100000/- for harassment and Rs.33000/- for litigation expenses) alongwith interest to the complainant.   

2.                          After registration of complaint, notice was issued to the opposite party. Opposite party in its reply has submitted that the surveyor was appointed by the company and after perusal and verification of documents and after receiving the reply from the previous insurance company through e-mail, it is found that after confirmation received from SBI General regarding the NCB confirmation-OD section cancel due to non-payment of NCB recovery amount hence the claim has been repudiated as no claim.  No claim is lodged by the complainant before the answering respondent in the said policy before filing the present complaint. On merits, it is submitted that the contents of FIR and untraced report are matter of record. That no such information/intimation was given to the answering respondent regarding the theft of the vehicle by the complainant. That no such repudiation vide letter dated 19.09.2016 was issued by the answering opposite party to the complainant. That there is no deficiency in service on the part of OP and dismissal of complaint has been sought.

3.                          Ld. counsel for the complainant has tendered affidavit Ex.CW1/A, documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C8 and closed his evidence.  On the other hand, ld. counsel for OP has tendered affidavit Ex.RW1/A, documents Ex.R1 to Ex.R14 and closed his evidence.

4.                          We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through material aspects of the case very carefully.

5.                          After going through the file and hearing the parties it is observed that the claim of the complainant has been repudiated by the opposite party on the ground that that the complainant had concealed the fact of availing claim on his previous policy and has availed the benefit of NCB 20% in the present policy for which he was not entitled.  To prove its contention, opposite party has placed on record document Ex.R10. But it has not been specifically mentioned in document Ex.R10 that an OD claim has been pending before the SBI General Insurance Co. Ltd. Merely, it has been mentioned that claim status- No claim(OD Section cancelled due to non-payment of NCB recovery amount). After perusal of this document, it has not been confirmed that any claim has been pending before the previous insurer SBI General Ins. Co. Ltd. because the SBI General Insurance Co. has not disclosed any claim number or date of claim on which the claim has been registered with the SBI General Insurance Co. Ltd. by the complainant. In the absence of these facts, it cannot be presumed that any claim was pending before the previous SBI General Insurance Co. Ltd.

6.                          On the other hand, Ld. counsel for the complainant has pleaded that the claim of the complainant has been wrongly repudiated by the opposite party and has also 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 on the ground of availing the benefit of NCB is illegal. Perusal of the insurance policy i.e. Ex.R1 reveals that complainant has obtained NCB 20% i.e. Rs.6905/- at the time of availing the policy. As such complainant is entitled for the claim amount after deduction of 20% NCB benefit availed by him from the loss as assessed by the surveyor. As per survey report Ex.R6, the surveyor has assessed the loss amounting to Rs.78765/-.

7.                In view of the above, we come to the conclusion that complainant is entitled for the claim amount of Rs.78765/- less 20% NCB (Rs.6905/-)  i.e. Rs. 71860/-. As such we hereby allow the complaint and direct the opposite party to pay Rs.71860/-(Rupees Seventy one thousand eight hundred sixty only) alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing the present complaint i.e.22.05.2017 till its realization and shall also pay a sum of Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand only) as compensation on account of deficiency in service and litigation expenses to the complainant within one month from the date of decision.  

8.                         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:

08.04.2019                             

                                                         ................................................

                                                          Nagender Singh Kadian, President

                                                          …………………………………

                                                          Ved Pal, Member.

                                                                        ………………………………..

                                                                        Renu Chaudhary, Member.