Haryana

Bhiwani

CC/35/2019

Jatin - Complainant(s)

Versus

NIC - Opp.Party(s)

Monika Sharma

18 Jan 2024

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BHIWANI.

 

                                                Complaint Case No.: 35 of 2019

     Date of Institution   :12.02.2019

                                                Date of Decision     :         18.01.2024

 

Jatin son of Rajender Kumar R/o H.N o.171 Krishna Colony, Bhiwani, Tehsil and District Bhiwani.

                                                            ….Complainant.

Versus

1. National Insurance Company Ltd., 3 Middleton Street, Prafulla Chandra Sen Sarani, Kolkata, West Bengal-700071, through its Managing Director.

 

2. Branch Manager, National Insurance Company  Ltd., Divisional Office II, Narayan Complex, Second Floor, Civil Road, Rohtak, Tehsil and District, Rohtak.

 

3. Branch Manager, National Insurance Company Ltd., Near Ghanta Ghar Chowk, Opp. Civil Hospital, Bhiwani, Tehsil and District Bhiwani.

....Opposite Parties.

 

                 COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 12 OF THE

CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 1986.

 

Before: -    Smt. Saroj Bala Bohra, Presiding Member.

Ms. Shashi Kiran Panwar, Member.

 

Present:     Ms. Malika Sheoran, Advocate for complainants.

                 Sh. M.L. Sardana, Advocate for OPs.

        

ORDER

Saroj Bala Bohra, Presiding Member   

1.           Brief facts of this case are that complainant is registered owner of vehicle Maruti Suzuki Ritz bearing regn. No.HR61C-5987, Engine No.7100369 Chassis No.560098, Model 08/2016 which was first party full insured with OP No.1 vide policy No.35101031166338747197 for the period commencing from 25.08.2016 to 24.08.2017 for a sum of Rs.4,19,900/- by paying a premium of Rs.25,659/-. On 17.06.2017 at about 10:00 P.M., Naresh Kumar so of Sh. Roshan Lal R/o Bichla Bazar, Jogi Wali Gali, Bhiwani was driving the said vehicle. On the way at Tosham Bye-pass, Biwani suddenly a black bull came in from of the car and due to which, the car was disbalanced and struck against divider  and vehicle of complainant damaged completely. Intimation qua this was given to OPs, surveyor was appointed who inspected the vehicle  and a report of full damage to the vehicle prepared and informed the complainant. Threafter, complainant submitted claim and denied the same vide letter dated 04.09.2018 on the ground that driving license of the driver was not valid on the date of accident.  It has been stated that the vehicle was source of income of complainant’s family  and because of its damage, they are facing hardship for livelihood. So, legal notice  dated 15.12.2018 was served upon the OPs but of no avail. Hence, the present complaint has been preferred alleging deficiency in service on the part of OPs and thereby direct them to pay Rs.4,19,900/- as IDV of the vehicle alongwith interest 18% per annum from the date of filing of claim till actual realization and also other benefits. Furhter to pay Rs.11.00 lacs as compensation for monetary loss, Rs.2.00 lac as compensation for harassment besides Rs.25,000/- as litigation expenses.  Any other relief, to which this Commission deems fit has alos been sought.
2.           Ops appeared through counsel and tendered reply raising preliminary objections qua maintainability and jurisdiction. On merits,  it is submitted that on receipt of information qua accident, Sh. Ashok Sharma, Surveyor was deputed to investigate the fact of the alleged accident, report thereto was submitted on 12.08.2017 who assessed total loss to the vehicle to the tune of Rs.3,74,000/- (Rs.3,25,040/- amount of replaced parts + Rs.49,500/- as labour charges)  expected salvage value was assesses as Rs.20,000/-. Thereafter, Sh. Karambir Singh Malik, Surveyor was appointed to give opinion regading wrack value of the vehicle, who vide his report dated 23.10.2017 as wrack value of car to the tune of Rs.75,000/- with R.C.. Furhter, Sh. Pardeep Kumar Gupta, Surveyor was also appointed who verified driving license of Naresh Kumar from Licensing Authority, Bhiwani for Motor cycle W/G, Scooter,Car and LMV-NT only. Sh. Ravi Kumar Chhabra, Advocate was deputed to verify the driving license from RTA, Hisar who reported that the driving license was renewed from office of RTA, Hisar from 08.10.2010 to 07.10.2013 and from 06.06.2014 to 05.06.2017. Thus, letter dated 22.08.20-18 was issued to complainant informing  that DL of driver concerned was not valid and to clarify this fact within seven days, otherwise the file will be closed as No Claim. However, registered letter dated 04.09.2018 was also issued to complainant in this regard, in reply thereto, complainant submitted application dated 14.09.2018, vided which DL was shown to be renewed from 06.08.2014 to 05.08.2017. As such, on the alleged day of accident the driver on wheels  was not holding valid driving license authorizing him to drive the insured vehicle. Hence, there was breach of insurance policy and the claim was righlty closed as No Caim.  As such, prayed no deficiency in service on their part and dismiss the complaint with costs.
3.           In evidence of complainant, documents Annexure C-1 to Annexure C-17 have been filed and then closed the evidence.
4.            On the other side, affidavit of Sh. Mohit Pahal, Branch Manager as Ex.R-1 alongwith  documents Annexure R-1 to Annexure R-9 have been filed in evidence and then closed the same.
5.           We have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record carefully.

6.                     At the outset, complanant in order to substantiate the contents of complaint has placed on record verification report of driving license No.BWN/CDL/569/04 pertaining to driver of the accidental vehicle Naresh Kumar S/o Sh. Roshan Lal whereby it reveals that  the said licence was issued by Licensing Authority, Bhiwani on 08.02.2005 to drive Motorcycle/LMV valid upto 07.02.2025 (Annexure C-4). Further the license was authorized to drive HTV/HPV for the period from 08.10.2010 to 07.10.2013 by L.A-cum- Secretary, RTA, Hisar and it was renewed from 06.08.2014 to 05.08.2017 vide DL No. HR3920050200647.  Sh. Ashok Sharma, Surveyor vide his report (Annexure R-3)  has recommended a claim of Rs.3,64,400/- in favour of complainant and he has not disputed the license of the complainant.

7.                     Learned counsel for complainant has argued that the OPs has wrongly and illegaly repudiated the genuine claim of complainant on the false and frivolous ground as invalid driving license of driver of the vehicle whereas the driver was duly authorized to drive the car on the day of accident. As such, the act & conduct of OPs amount to gross negligence and deficiency in service and prayed for allow of the complaint.

8.                     On the other side, learned counsle for Ops has argued that the claim was rightly repudiated by the OP insurance company as the driver was not having a valid drving license at the time of accident. In support of his contention,  the counsel has placed reliance on case law delivered by Hon’ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi in case titled National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. M.S. Bhati R.P. No.1842 of 2016 decided on 25.10.2018.

9.                     After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the entire record on file including verification of DL (Annexure C-4), copy of DL (Annexure C-11) and  online record of the license (Annexure C-17) reveals that the DL of driver Naresh Kumar was valid upto 05.08.2017 and he was authorized to drive the vehicle met with an accident on 17.06.2017.  As per policy (Annexure R-9), IDV of the vehicle is reported as Rs.4,19,900/-. Accordingly, we are of the considered view that the OP insurance company illegaly and arbitrarily repudiated the genuine claim of complainant which amounts to gross negligence, deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice on their part which caused complainant monetary loss as well as mental and phsycial harassment. Hence, the complaint is allowed  and OPs, jointly and severally, are directed to comply with the following directions within fourty days from the communication of this order:-

(i)        To pay a sum of Rs.4,19,900/- (Rs. Four lacs nineteen thousand nine hundred) as IDV of the vehicle in question, to the complainant alongwith simple interest @ 9% per annum from the date of institution of complaint to till its realization subject to completion of necessary formaltities qua the accidental vehicle in favour of OP Insurance Company by the complainant within 15 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

(ii)       Also to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rs. Ten thousand) on account of harassment  caused to the complainant at the hands of Ops.

(iii)      Also to pay a sum of Rs.55,00/- (Rs. Five thousand five hundred) on account of litigation expenses.

                        Further the award issued above must be complied with by the OPs within the stipulated period failing which all the awarded amounts shall further attract simple interest @ 12% per annum for the period of default.  If this order is not complied with, then the complainant shall be entitled to the execution petition under section 71 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 and in that eventuality, the opposite party may also be liable for prosecution under Section 72 of the said Act which envisages punishment of imprisonment, which may extend to three years or fine upto rupees one lac or with both.  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.

Dated: 18.01.2024

                                    (Shashi Kiran Panwar)                    (Saroj Bala Bohra)            

                                                       Member                           Presiding Member

District Consumer

Disputes Redressal

Commission, Bhiwani.