BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BHIWANI.
Complaint No.:217 of 2013.
Date of Institution: 16.04.2013.
Date of Decision:05.04.2017
- Smt. Bimla aged 45 years widow of Sh. Surender Kumar Sharma, 2- Manoj aged 20 years, 3- Anil 19 aged years sons and 3- Sunita Kumari aged 25 years daughter of Sh. Surender Kumar Sharma, all residents of village Dhani Rahimpur, Tehsil Loharu, District Bhiwani.
….Complainants.
Versus
- The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., Branch Office, Fountain Chowk, Rohtak Road, Charkhi Dadri, District Bhiwani, through its Branch Manager/Authorized Person.
- The Divisional Manager, Division Office, in front of D-Park, Delhi Road, Rohtak.
...Opposite Parties.
COMPLAINT U/S 12 OF CONSUMER PROECTION ACT.
BEFORE: Shri Rajesh Jindal, President
Mr. Parmod Kumar, Member
Present:- Shri Mahesh Bhardwaj, Advocate, for complainants.
Shri Mukesh Jangra, Advocate for OPs.
ORDER:-
Rajesh Jindal, President:
The case of the complainants in brief, are that the deceased Surender was the husband of complainant no. 1 and father of the complainants no. 2 to 4, who was the registered owner of Bolero Jeep beraing No. HR-61-7965 and the same was insured with the Ops. It is alleged that deceased Surender was died on 02.12.2008 and the complainant no. 1 informed the death of her husband to the authorized agent of the Ops company. It is alleged that after the accident, the complainant no. 2 visited in the office of OP no. 1 and submitted all the relevant documents for settle the insured amount but to no avail. It is alleged that on dated 11.05.2011, the Ops dispatched a letter regarding the above said claim with comment that ‘your claim has been repudiated, because the policy was in the name of Surender Kumar. The complainants further alleged that due to the act and conduct of the respondents, they had to suffer mental agony, humiliation and harassment. Hence, it amounts to deficiency in service on the part of respondents and as such they had to file the present complaint for seeking compensation.
2. On appearance, the OPs filed written statement alleging therein that the complainants by way of misrepresentation got the vehicle insured in the name of the registered owner without disclosing that at the time of purchasing the insurance policy, the registered owner had already died and the vehicle was not registered in favour of his legal heirs. It is submitted that the factum of death of the deceased Surender Sharma came to the notice of the respondent company when the claim form was signed by the complainant no. 2 instead of his father, who is the insured and since the legal heirs did not get the policy transferred in their favour so as per policy condition the policy expired automatically and hence the complainant have no insurable interest. Hence, in view of the facts and circumstances mentioned above, there is no deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties and complaint of the complainant is liable to be dismissed with costs.
3. In order to make out his case, the counsel for complainant has tendered into evidence affidavit CW1/A and documents Annexure I to Annexure VIII.
4. In reply thereto, the counsel for opposite parties has tendered into evidence documents Annexure R-1 to Annexure R-4.
5. We have gone through the record of the case carefully and have heard the learned counsels for the parties.
6. Learned counsel for the complainant reiterated the contents of the complaint. He submitted that the vehicle in question was insured from 06.09.2010 to 05.09.2011 by the OP. The vehicle was registered in the name of Surender, now deceased the husband of the complainant no. 1. The vehicle in question met with an accident and the claim was lodged by the complainant with the Ops but the OP repudiated the claim of the complainant vide letter dated 11.05.2011. He submitted that the husband of the complainant died on 02.12.2008 and the vehicle was financed from the finance company and the insurance of the vehicle was continuous in the name of the husband of the complainant after his death. The complainant’s being the legal heirs of Surender are entitled to get indemnify the loss from the insurance company.
7. Learned counsel for the Ops reiterated the contents of the reply. He submitted that Surender the husband of the complainant died on 02.12.2008 and after his death the policy was obtained on the basis of the registration certificate of the vehicle, without getting the vehicle transferred in the name of the legal heirs after the death of the Surender Kumar. He further submitted that as per the policy condition, the policy expired immediately if the legal heirs do not get policy transferred in their favour. The complainant’s have no insurable interest. The claim of the complainant has been rightly repudiated by the OP. He submitted that as per the terms and conditions of the policy, surveyor assessed the loss at Rs. 35050/- vide surveyor report dated 24.04.2011 Annexure R-4. In support of his contention he relied upon the following judgment:-
Tecon Valves Pvt. Ltd. Versus New India Assurance Company Ltd. IV (2013) CPJ 170 of Hon’ble Union Territory State Commission, Chandigarh.
8. In the light of the pleadings and arguments of the parties, we have perused the record, carefully. The material facts of the case are not in dispute. The claim of the complainant has been repudiated by the insurance company solely on the ground that the vehicle was registered in the name of the husband of the complainant no. 1 and the policy was issued in his name and the husband of the complainant no. 1 had died on 02.12.2008 well before the accident on 25.02.2011 and the legal heirs have no insurable interest. As per the contention of the complainant, the policy was being issued in his name, because the vehicle was financed from the finance company, hence the finance company renewing the same continuously in the name of the deceased. Admittedly, as on the date of accident the vehicle in question was covered with the insurance policy issued by the OP for the vehicle in question and the complainant’s are the legal heirs of the insured Surender (now deceased). Taking into account every aspect of the case, we partly allow the complaint of the complainant and direct the Ops to pay the sum of Rs. 35050/- the loss assessed by the surveyor to the Ops. The Ops are directed to comply with this order within 60 days from the date of passing of this order, otherwise the Ops shall be liable to pay the interest at the rate of 8 per cent per annum on the aforesaid amount till the date of payment. Certified copies of the order be sent to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room, after due compliance.
Announced in open Forum.
Dated: 05.04.2017. (Rajesh Jindal)
President,
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum, Bhiwani.
(Parmod Kumar)
Member.
