Haryana

Yamunanagar

CC/495/2012

Ram Swaroop S/o Raja Ram - Complainant(s)

Versus

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

V.K.Rajouria

15 May 2017

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, YAMUNA   NAGAR

                                                                                         Complaint No. 495 of  2012.

                                                                                         Date of institution: 21.05.2012.

                                                                                         Date of decision: 15.05.2017.

Ram Sawroop  son of Sh. Raja Ram, R/o H. No. 170/202, D.L.Road Dehradun (Uttra Khand) since deceased now represented through his legal heirs:-

1. Balesh Devi widow,
2. Deepak son
3. Rahul Kumar

All residents of House No. 170/202, D.L. Road Dehradun (Uttrakhand)

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 …Complainant.

                                    Versus

The New India Assurance Company Limited, N.N. Building Akhara Bazar, Kullu (H.P) through its one of the Branch Office at Near Dr. Sham Lal, Near Telephone Exchange, Yamuna Nagar.

                                                                                              ...Respondent

                         

BEFORE:       SH. ASHOK KUMAR GARG, PRESIDENT

                        SH. S.C.SHARMA, MEMBER.

                        SMT. VEENA RANI SHEOKAND, MEMBER.

                        

Present: Sh. V.K. Rajoria, Advocate, counsel for complainant.   

              Sh. Rajiv Gupta, Advocate, counsel for respondent.

 

ORDER

 

1.                     The present complaint has been filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 by Ram Swroop. However, lateron complainant Ram Sawroop expired during pendency of complaint and his legal heirs No. I to III were impleaded who hereinafter will be referred as complainants. 

2.                     Brief facts of the present complaint, as alleged in the complaint are that the complainant is owner of one bus bearing registration No. UK-07-PA-0259 having old Registration No. HP01PA-2042. The bus in question was insured with the respondent (hereinafter respondent will be referred as OP Insurance Company) vide insurance policy bearing No. 35240/31/03/01/00023128 dated 11.03.2009. Unfortunately, on 18.02.2009 when the bus in question was returning from Ambala to Dehradun with Baratis and reached near Thana Chhappar, District Yamuna Nagar, all of sudden one tractor trolley came in front of the said bus due to which bus in question fell in a khudd and badly damaged. Immediately, an intimation regarding accident was given to the Op Insurance Company Branch office Jagadhri on 19.02.2009. The said bus was taken to M/s Bhagwati Motor Workshop, Dehradun for its repair and the complainant paid Rs. 10,000/- on account of crane charges. The complainant spent an amount of Rs. 1,96,990/- on account of repairing of the bus in question. The complainant lodged his claim with the OP Insurance Company and after its repair complainant requested to the OP Insurance Company to conduct the final survey. All the relevant documents were submitted to the Op Insurance Company but the OP Insurance Company did not pay the spent amount to the complainant, therefore, complainant filed a complaint bearing No. 230/2010 before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Dehradun. However, the said complaint was dismissed for want of jurisdiction with liberty to file the present complaint before this Forum. Lastly, it has been prayed that till date, the Op Insurance Company had not paid any amount to the complainant. Lastly, prayed for directing the OP Insurance Company to pay Rs. 1,96,990/- alongwith interest and also to pay compensation as well as litigation expenses. Hence this complaint.

3.                     Upon notice Op Insurance Company appeared and filed its written statement besides some preliminary objections it has been mentioned on merit that one Sh. Ghanshyam Sood C/o M/s Harison Travels A.B. Distt. Kullu got his bus No. HP-01-2042 bearing chassis Number/ Engine No. 0000121943/161424 insured with the Op Insurance Company vide policy bearing No. 35240131070100023128 valid from 12.03.2008 to 11.03.2009. However, the ownership of the bus in question bearing No. UK-07PA-0259 was denied for want of knowledge and subject to submission of the documents. Rest contents of the complaint also denied for want of knowledge, incorrect and being manipulated one. Lastly, prayed for dismissal of complaint.

4.                     In support of his case, complainant tendered into evidence his affidavit as Annexure CW/A and documents such as certified copy of judgment/ order dated 24.03.2012 of District Consumer Forum, Dehradun as Annexure C-1, Photo copy of registration certificate of bus bearing No. UK07PA0259 Annexure C-2, Carbon copy of intimation letter as Annexure C-3, Photo copy of request letter as Annexure C-4, C-5 and C-6, Postal receipt as Annexure C-7, Letter dated 16.032009 issued by the Op Insurance Company as Annexure C-8, Photo copy of request letter dated 11.06.2009 as Annexure C-9, Photo copy of Insurance Policy as Annexure C-10, Photo copy of RC as Annexure C-11, Photo copy of temporary permit as Annexure C-12, Photo copy of DL of Rakesh Sharma as Annexure C-13, Photo copy of duplicate bills  etc. of repair as Annexure C-14 to C-19, Photo copy of certified copy of order dated 06.02.2010 of District Court Dehradun as Annexure C-20 and C-21, Photo copy of legal registered notice as Annexure C-22, Postal receipt and acknowledgement as Annexure C-23 and C-24 and closed his evidence.

5.                     On the other hand, counsel for the OP tendered into evidence affidavit of B.L. Jagwan, Divisional Manager as Annexure RW/A and documents such as Photo copy of order/judgment of Dehradun District Forum as Annexure R-1, Photo copy of affidavit submitted before Dehradun Forum on behalf of Op Insurance company as Annexure R-2, Photo copy of insurance policy alongwith terms and conditions as Annexure R-3, Photo copy of registration certificate  of bus bearing No. HP01-2042 as Annexure R-4 and closed the evidence on behalf of OP Insurance Company.

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

7                      The only version of the complainant is that the OP Insurance Company has wrongly and illegally repudiated the claim of the complainant on account of damages to the bus bearing No. UK-07PA-0259 having old registration No. HP-01-2042 which was met with an accident during the currency of insurance policy in question. Learned counsel for the complainant draw our attention towards the copy of insurance policy Annexure C-10 and argued that as per this insurance policy bus bearing registration No. HP-01-2042 was insured with the Op Insurance Company w.e.f. 12.03.2008 to 11.03.2009 for IDV of Rs. 3,80,000/-. Learned counsel for the complainant further draw our attention towards the repair bills Annexure C-14 to C-19 and argued that complainant has spent Rs. 1,96,950/- on the repair of the bus in question. Lastly, prayed for acceptance of complaint.

8.                     On the other hand, learned counsel for the OP Insurance Company argued at length that there was no privity of contract between the complainant and OP insurance Company, as per record of the insurance company bus bearing registration No. HP-01-2042 bearing Engine Number/ Chassis No. 001219443/161424 as insured with the OP Insurance Company in the name of one Sh. Ghanshyam Sood C/o Harison Travels, AB. Kullu, Distt. Kullu In this regard, learned counsel for the OP Insurance Company draw our attention towards the insurance policy Annexure R-3 and further draw our attention towards registration certificate in respect of Bus bearing No. HP-01-2042 Annexure R-4 in which also the name of previous owner Sh. Ghanshyam Dass is mentioned. Learned counsel for the OP Insurance Company further argued that the complainant has totally failed to disclose in his complaint that on what date and month he purchased the bus from the previous owner and registration certificate and bus in question was transferred in his name on what date and month. Learned counsel for the OP Insurance company draw our attention towards the invisible entry on the registration certificate Annexure R-4 at bottom wherein it has been mentioned that NOC issued to RTO Dehradun w.e.f. 29.08.2008 and argued that as per this endorsement on Annexure R-4, it is clear that the complainant purchased the bus in question prior to 29.08.2008 and alleged accident had taken place on 19.02.2009 and argued that as per Motor Vehicle Act section 57(2) wherein it has been mentioned that transfer shall apply within 14 days from the date of purchase of vehicle to transfer the insurance policy in his name on the prescribed form alongwith prescribed fee, if any, to change the policy in question but in the present case the complainant has failed to apply for transfer of the insurance policy in his name and till the date of accident, the insurance policy was standing in the name of previous owner. Further, learned counsel for the OP argued that even the complainant has totally failed to place on file any documentary evidence vide which he ever lodged any claim with the OP Insurance Company either at Kullu (H.P) the issuing office of the insurance policy or at the branch of Jagadhri i.e. where the cause of action has arisen. The complainant has also not disclosed any name of any surveyor who was deputed by the OP Insurance Company to assess the loss of the bus in question. Lastly, prayed for dismissal of complaint.

9.                     After hearing both the parties, we are of the considered view that there is no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of OP Insurance Company as the complainant has totally failed to prove that on what date he purchased the bus in question from the previous owner and he ever applied for transfer of the insurance policy in question or not. Even, the complainant has also totally failed to prove that he had ever lodged any claim with the insurance policy issuing office at Kullu or branch office Jagadhri where the cause of action has arisen as no documentary evidence has been placed on file. Even, the complainant has not disclosed the name of surveyor who was deputed by the Op Insurance Company and what  claim number was allotted to the claim lodged by the complainant. Furthermore, we have gone through the photo copies of bill placed on file by the complainant as Annexure C-14 to C-18 and from the perusal of these  bills it is duly evident these bills were issued on 15.09.2010 whereas alleged accident took place on 19.02.2009. Meaning thereby that, the bills Annexure C-14 to C-18 has been issued after a period of one year and seven months from the date of alleged accident. From this angle also, it is clear that complainant might have not lodged any claim with the OP Insurance Company. We have also gone through the judgment/order passed by the Hon’ble District Consumer Forum, Dehradoon Annexure C-1 wherein also it is nowhere mentioned that whether any claim was lodged by the complainant with the OP Insurance Company and any surveyor was deputed and what amount was assessed by the said surveyor. We have also gone through the written statement filed by the OP Insurance Company wherein also no such facts have been disclosed by the OP Insurance Company. The onus to prove that any claim was lodged with the OP Insurance Company was on the complainant but the complainant has totally failed to prove the same.

10.                   In the circumstances noted above and case law referred by the counsel for the OPs  titled as Bharti Axa General Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Karni Paints & Hardware Store & others, 2016(2) CLT page 168  and another case titled as Amrik Singh Versus Unitech Limited & Others, 2016(2) CLT page 173, we are of the considered view that the complainant Ram Sawroop was not having any insurable interest in the bus in question as the insurance policy in question was standing in the name of previous owner i.e. Sh. Ghanshyam Sood and the complainant has totally failed to prove that he ever got transferred the insurance policy in his name, hence, we are of the considered view that the complainant was not having any insurable interest in the bus in question at the time of alleged accident.  On the other angle also, the complainant has failed to prove that any claim was lodged with any branch of the OP Insurance Company and any accident took place as the complainant has also not placed on file any copy of DDR, FIR or photographs of the bus in question.  

11.                   Resultantly, we find no merit in the present complaint and the same is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs. 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. 15.05.2017.

 

                                                                                                ( ASHOK KUMAR GARG)

                                                                                           PRESIDENT

 

                                                                                                                                                                     

   (VEENA RANI  SHEOKAND)                                 (S.C.SHARMA)

      MEMBER                                                                MEMBER