DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II U.T. CHANDIGARH [Complaint Case No: 304 of 2010] Date of Institution : 18.05.2010 Date of Decision : 07.04.2011 Sh. Avtar Singh resident of House No.114/1, Sector 29-B, Chandigarh. ---Complainant. V E R S U SNew India Assurance Company Limited through its Senior Divisional Manager, Batra Building, Sector 17, Chandigarh. ---Opposite Party.BEFORE: SHRI LAKSHMAN SHARMA PRESIDENT SMT. MADHU MUTNEJA MEMBER Argued By:Sh. Sunil Dixit, Advocate for the complainant. Ms. Madhu Sharma, Advocate for the OP. PER LAKSHMAN SHARMA, PRESIDENT Sh. Avtar Singh has filed this complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 praying for the following reliefs:- i) To pay the claim of Rs.16,000/- on account of loss suffered to the vehicle. ii) To pay an amount of Rs.30,000/- as damages due to deficiency in service on the part of OP. iii) To pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation for harassment and mental agony. iv) Any other relief as may be deemed fit by the Forum. 2. In brief the case of the complainant is that he purchased Tata 207 bearing registration No.CH-01-Y-8968 from NITCO Roadways, Chandigarh. The said vehicle was transferred in his name on 17.6.2008 vide Registration Certificate (Annexure C-1). The said vehicle was insured with the OP Insurance Company vide Policy No.00004808 (Annexure C-2) for the period from 10.2.2008 to 9.2.2009. Unfortunately, the said vehicle met with an accident on 31.1.2009 within the limits of Chandigarh resulting into loss to the vehicle to the tune of Rs.16,880/-. As per the complainant, he duly informed the OP Insurance Company about the incident, upon which, a Surveyor/Investigator was appointed by the OP to assess the loss. The complainant supplied all the necessary documents relating to the claim to the said surveyor in order to settle his claim as early as possible. According to the complainant, to his utter surprise, the OP rejected his claim on the ground that since the Insurer Certificate is not transferred in his name, so he has no insurable interest and is not entitled for any claim whatsoever. As per the complainant, in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble National Commission, New Delhi in the case of Shri Narayan Vs. New India Assurance Company Ltd., 2008 (1) C.P.C. 257, once the registration certificate is transferred in the name of the person, it is presumed that the insurance certificate is automatically transferred in his name. Thus, the repudiation of his claim is illegal and amounts to deficiency in service on its part. So, the present complaint has been filed seeking the reliefs mentioned above. 3. In the reply filed by the OP, it has been admitted that the car had met with an accident and the complainant had filed a proper claim. The case of the OP is that earlier the car was owned by M/s Nitco Roadways Pvt. Ltd. as per Annexure R-1. Later on, it was purchased by the complainant. However, he (complainant) did not apply for the transfer of the policy in his name. So, the vehicle remained insured in the name of M/s Nitco Roadways Pvt. Ltd.. According to the OP, if a policy is not transferred in the name of the purchaser/registered owner within 14 days of such transfer, then the registered owner does not have any insurable interest and is not entitled to get any claim. It has further been pleaded that the petition filed by the complainant for the said relief was also dismissed by the Ombudsman vide order dated 16.6.2009 (Annexure R-2). Thus, according to the OP, there is no deficiency on its part, so the complaint deserves dismissal. 4. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record including documents, annexures and affidavits etc. 5. From Annexure C-1, it is apparent that M/s Nitco Roadways Pvt. Ltd. was the previous owner of the vehicle and it was sold to the complainant. The said vehicle was registered in the name of the complainant on 17.6.2008. Annexure C-2 is the copy of Insurance Cover Note. From the perusal of this document, it is apparent that the vehicle in question was insured for the period from 10.2.2008 to 9.2.2009 in the name of M/s Nitco Roadways Pvt. Ltd. 6. General Regulation 17 of the Indian Motor Tariff Act provides as under: - “GR.17 Transfers On transfer of ownership, the Liability Only cover, either under a Liability Only policy or under a Package policy, is deemed to have been transferred in favour of the person to whom the motor vehicle is transferred with effect from the date of transfer. The transferee shall apply within fourteen days from the date of transfer in writing under recorded delivery to the insurer who has insured the vehicle, with the details of the registration of the vehicle, the previous owner of the vehicle and the number and date of the insurance policy so that the insurer may make the necessary changes in his record and issue fresh Certificate of Insurance. In case of Package Policies, transfer of the “Own Damage” section of the policy in favour of the transferee, shall be made by the insurer only on receipt of a specific request from the transferee along with consent of the transferor. If the transferee is not entitled to the benefit of the No Claim Bonus (NCB) shown on the policy, or is entitled to a lesser percentage of NCB than the existing in the policy, recovery of the difference between the transferee’s entitlement, if any, and that shown on the policy shall be made before effecting the transfer. A fresh Proposal Form duly completed is to be obtained from the transferee in respect of both Liability Only and Package Policies. Transfer of Package Policy in the name of the transferee can be done only on getting acceptable evidence of sale and a fresh proposal form duly filled and signed. The old Certificate of Insurance for the vehicle, is required to be surrendered and a fee of Rs.50 is to be collected for issue of fresh Certificate in the name of the transferee. If for any reason, the old Certificate of Insurance cannot be surrendered, a proper declaration to that effect is to be taken from the transferee before a new Certificate of Insurance is issued.” 7. From perusal of the above said regulation, it is apparent that the transferee has to apply for the transfer of the insurance policy within a period of fourteen days. In the present case, neither there is any pleading nor any evidence to the effect that the complainant had applied for the transfer of the policy, which was in the name of M/s Nitco Roadways Pvt. Ltd. to his name. In these circumstances, on the date of accident i.e.31.1.2009, the complainant was not having any insurable interest in the vehicle in question. So, the claim of the complainant has been rightly repudiated. This view stands fortified with the ratio of the case titled New India Assurance Company Ltd. Vs. Chandrakant Bhujangrao Jogdand, II (2010) CPJ 170 (NC), wherein the Hon’ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi has observed in Paras 7 and 8 as under: - “ 7. In terms of the said Regulation, the transferee has to apply in writing within 14 days from the date of transfer of the insurer for making necessary changes and issue of fresh certificate of insurance. In case of package policies, the transfer of “Own Damage” in favour of the transferee shall be made by the insurer only on receipt of a specific request along with consent of the transferor. The difference in No Claim Bonus, if the transferee is not entitled to same, is required to be taken into consideration and difference, if any is required to be paid by the transferee. Besides this, fresh Proposal Form duly completed is to be obtained from the transferee in respect of package policies. 8. The State Commission in the impugned order has relied upon judgment of this Commission in Om Prakash Gupta and Another (supra), which was decided on the basis of General Regulation-10 in the Indian Motor Tariff, which was in existence upto 30.6.2002. Likewise, Narayan Singh v. New India Assurance Company Ltd., IV (2007) CPJ 289 (NC), was also decided on the basis of Indian Motor Tariff Regulations as it existed at that time. Therefore, the said judgments of this Commission cannot be applied to the changed scenario relating to transfer under General Regulation-17 of the Indian Motor Tariff, which came into existence from 1.7.2002.” 8. In view of the above findings, the complaint is dismissed with no orders as to costs. 9. Certified copy of this order be communicated to the parties, free of charge. After compliance file be consigned to record room. Announced 7th April 2011.Sd/- (LAKSHMAN SHARMA) PRESIDENT Sd/- (MADHU MUTNEJA) MEMBER Ad/- [Complaint Case No.304 of 2010] ORDER PRESENT: None. --- Arguments heard on 05.04.2011. The case was reserved for orders. As per separate detailed order of even date, this complaint is dismissed. After compliance file be consigned. Announced. [MADHU MUTNEJA] [LAKSHMAN SHARMA] 07.04.2011 Member President
| | MR. A.R BHANDARI, MEMBER | HONABLE MR. LAKSHMAN SHARMA, PRESIDENT | MRS. MADHU MUTNEJA, MEMBER | | 
