Punjab

Sangrur

CC/307/2018

Jaswinder Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

New India Assurance Company Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Sh.G.S.Chatha

05 Apr 2019

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SANGRUR

                            

 

                                                                        Complaint No. 307

Instituted on:   20.07.2018

                                                                        Decided on:     05.04.2019

 

Jaswinder Singh son of Balwinder Singh, resident of Baba Ganga Ram Colony, Near Baba Bhai Mool Chand Samadh, Sunam, Distt. Sangrur 148 028.

 

                                                        …. Complainant.       

                                         Versus

 

1.     The New India Assurance Company Ltd. New India Assurance Building 86, MG Road, Fort, Mumbai 400 001 through its M.D.

2.     The New India Assurance Company Ltd. College Road, Sangrur through its Branch Manager 148 001.

             ….Opposite parties

 

 

FOR THE COMPLAINANT:      Shri G.S.Chatha, Advocate                          

 

FOR OPP. PARTIES          :       Shri Ashish Garg, Advocate.

Quorum

         

                   Vinod Kumar Gulati, Presiding Member

                    Manisha, Member

 

ORDER:   

 

Vinod Kumar Gulati, Presiding Member

 

1.             Shri Jaswinder Singh, complainant (referred to as complainant in short) has preferred the present complaint against the opposite parties (referred to as OPs in short) on the ground that the complainant availed the services of the OPs by getting insured his Maruti Swift car bearing registration number PB13-AT-4664 vide insurance policy number 98000031170305232903 from 13.4.2017 to 12.4.2018 and the policy in question was cashless and zero depreciation policy.  Further case of the complainant is that the vehicle of the complainant in question damaged in an accident on 14.7.2017 at railway crossing Dhuri and the car was damaged badly due to the accident, of which case number 763/17 dated 15.7.2017 was registered at RPF/OUTPOST/Dhuri against Ravi Kumar son of Rajinder Kumar, resident of Sangrur, who was driving the car at the time of accident. Thereafter the complainant intimated the Ops about the accident and on the instructions of the Ops, the car in question was brought at Max Autos, Sangrur and the surveyor of the Ops completed the formalities.  Further case of the complainant is that as per the assurance of the Ops, the complainant got repaired the damaged vehicle and paid to the repairer an amount of Rs.78,496/-, but thereafter the Ops repudiated the claim of the complainant vide letter dated 18.10.2017. Though the complainant got served a legal notice dated 18.5.2018 upon the Ops, but nothing happened. Thus, alleging deficiency in service on the part of the OPs, the complainant has prayed that the OPs be directed to the complainant the claim amount of Rs.78,496/- along with interest @ 18% per annum from the date of accident till realization and further the complainant has claimed compensation and litigation expenses.

 

2.             In reply filed by Ops, it is admitted that the complainant got insured his car in question for the period from 13.4.2017 to 12.4.2018 subject to the terms and conditions of the policy for Rs.5,29,724/-.  It is stated further that after receipt of the intimation dated 25.7.2017 about the accident, the Ops immediately appointed Shri V.K. Kohli, surveyor and loss assessor to assess the final loss as the insured  di not get conducted the spot survey.  The surveyor after inspection assessed the loss to the tune of Rs.78,318/- as net loss after deducting Rs.1000/- as policy clause.  It is further stated that during the process of file, it was revealed that as per the police record GRP Dhuri, the accident took place due to negligence of Ravi Kumar driver of the car in question, who intentionally struck his car into railway phatak Kaulseri, which was closed at that time and the driver did not stop the car and crossed the railway phatak after breaking the barrier.  As such, it is stated that the claim has rightly been repudiated.

 

3.             The learned counsel for the complainant has produced Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-11. On the other hand, the learned counsel for OPs has produced Ex.OPs/1 to Ex.OPs/8 copies of documents and affidavit and closed evidence.

 

4.             We have given a thoughtful consideration to the rival contentions of the parties and heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties. The learned counsel for the parties have not produced written arguments. 

 

5.             It is an admitted fact between the parties that the complainant availed the services of the Ops by getting insured his Maruti Swift Car bearing registration number PB-13-AT-4664 vide insurance policy number 98000031170305232903 for the period from 13.4.2017 to 12.4.2018. The vehicle of the complainant damaged in an accident on 14.7.2017 at Railway crossing Dhuri and the case was registered on dated 15.7.2017 against one Ravi Kumar who was driving the car at the time of the accident. The complainant in his complaint has submitted that he brought the car to M/s. Max Autos and the complainant got repaired the vehicle and paid an amount of Rs.78,496/-.  The Ops repudiated the claim of the complainant vide letter dated 18.10.2017 on the basis of the breaching the mandatory terms and conditions of the policy.  From the perusal of the report, Ex.C-7, it has been observed that the accident took place due to the negligence of the driver, who struck/hit his car into railway crossing barrier and DDR was registered against the driver and he was arrested and was sent to 14 days judicial custody.  Further the terms and conditions submitted by the Ops Ex.OP1/2 page 1 to 12 have been gone through and as per the condition at serial number 4  “The insured shall take all reasonable steps to safeguard the vehicle from loss or damage and to maintain it in efficient condition and the Company shall have at all times free and full access to examine the vehicle or any part thereof or any driver or employee of the insured. In the event of any accident or breakdown, the vehicle shall not be left unattended without proper precautions being taken to repairs are effected and extension of the damage or any further damage to the vehicle shall be entirely at the insured’s own risk”.  From the sequence of the events mentioned above, it is abundantly clear that the accident took place due to the negligence on the part of the driver and without taking care of the safety of the vehicle and the driver himself admitted this fact in the DDR dated 15.7.2017 Ex.C-7, which we find the violation of the terms and conditions of the policy at serial number 4 mentioned above.

 

6.             In the sequel of the above discussion, we find no merit in the case and the same is hereby dismissed. However, the parties are left to bear their own costs.  Copies of the orders be sent to the parties free of cost and there after file be consigned to record room.

                        Pronounced.

                        April 5, 2019.                                    

                                                          (Vinod Kumar Gulati)

                                                             Presiding Member

 

 

 

                                                                (Manisha)

                                                                  Member