Punjab

Sangrur

CC/31/2018

Kartar Kaur - Complainant(s)

Versus

Oriental Insurance Company Limited - Opp.Party(s)

Sh.Ajay Pal Singh

15 Apr 2019

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SANGRUR.

                                       

               

                                                Complaint No.  31

                                                Instituted on:    02.02.2018

                                                Decided on:       15.04.2019

 

 

Kartar Kaur wife of Gurdial Singh, resident of Village Rurka Khurd, Tehsil Malerkotla, District Sangrur.

                                                        …Complainant

                                Versus

1.Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. SCO No.126, Chhoti Baradari, Patiala through its Manager.

2.Max Autos, Dhuri Road, Sangrur through its Manager.

                                                        …Opposite parties

 

For the complainant  :               Shri S.S.Ratol, Adv.

For OP No.1             :               Shri Ashish Garg, Adv.

For OP No.2             :               Exparte.

 

Quorum:   Vinod Kumar Gulati, Presiding Member

                Manisha, Member

 

Order by : Vinod Kumar Gulati, Presiding Member.

 

1.             Smt. Kartar Kaur, 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 OP number 1 by getting insured his Swift car bearing registration number PB-13-AF-6111 vide insurance policy number 233503/31/2016/13601 for the period from 11.2.2016 to 10.2.2017. The grievance of the complainant is that on 27.10.2016, the car of the complainant met with an accident and he informed the OP immediately.  The complainant also got lodged DDR number 33 dated 28.10.2016 at PS Sadar Dhuri and thereafter the OP appointed a surveyor to asses the loss of the accidental car and told the complainant that the insurance company will release the claim.  On the assurance of the surveyor, the complainant got repaired her car from OP number 2 and spent an amount of Rs.1,03,000/- and paid the same amount vide cheque number 001674 dated 6.12.2016. Thereafter the complainant submitted all the bills to the OPs, but the claim of the complainant was not paid despite serving of legal notice dated 11.5.2017 through her counsel Shri K.S.Chahal, Advocate, Dhuri. Further case of the complainant is that the Ops did not pay the claim and repudiated the same vide letter dated 17.5.2017. Thus, alleging deficiency in service on the part of the OPs, the complainant has prayed that the OPs be directed to pay to the complainant the claim amount of Rs.1,03,000/- along with interest and further claimed compensation and litigation expenses.

 

2.             In reply filed by the OP number 1, it is admitted that the car of the complainant was insured with the OP for Rs.4,32,000/-.  It is also admitted that the complainant intimated the OP number 1 about the accident of the vehicle in question, as such the OP number 1 immediately  deputed Er. Rajesh Aggarwal for assessing the loss. The said surveyor physically inspected the vehicle in question and assessed the loss to the tune of Rs.81,015/- after deducting Rs.1000/- as excess clause and Rs.2000/- on account of salvage value.  The surveyor did not consider the parts which were extra replaced by the repairer.  Further case of the OP number 1 is that after examining the entire record, the OP number 1 repudiated the claim of the complainant as the driving license of Amandeep Singh Gill, driver was not valid and effective to drive the car in question.  The insured submitted the driving license of Amandeep Singh Gill son of Balwinder Singh issued on 6.8.2017 for LMV-GV/LMV-CAB/MCWG/Tractor which was valid for LMV-GV/LMB-CAB upto 29.8.2015 and for MCWG/Tractor upto 5.8.2027.  It is further averred that at the time of accident, the driver of the car in question was not holding  a valid and effective driving license to drive the car, as such, the claim is said to has rightly been repudiated. Thus, alleging no deficiency in service on its part, the OP has prayed for dismissal of the claim with special cost.

 

3.             Record shows that OP number 2 was proceeded against exparte.

 

4.             The learned counsel for the complainant has produced Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-11 copies of documents and affidavit and closed evidence. On the other hand, the learned counsel for OP number 1 has produced Ex.OP/1 to Ex.OP/15 copies of the documents and affidavit and closed evidence.

 

5.             We have carefully perused the complaint, version of the opposite parties and heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties. In our opinion, the complaint merits dismissal, for these reasons.

 

6.             It is admitted fact between the parties that the complainant is the owner of the Swift Car bearing Registration number-PB-13AF-6111 and got insured his vehicle from the OP no.1 on 11.02.2016 and the OP no.1 issued the policy valid for the period for 11.02.2016 to 10.02.2017. The above said Car met with an accident on 27.10.2016 and the complainant informed the OP no.1 regarding the said accident. The DDR number 33 dated 28.10.2016 was lodged at PS Sadar Dhuri. The OP no.1  appointed a Surveyor to assess the loss of the vehicle and the complainant got his car repaired from M/s MAX Auto Sangrur and paid an amount of Rs.1,03,000/- to the company vide cheque no. 001674  dated 06.12.2016. The complainant in his complaint has alleged that the surveyor deputed by the OP number 1  directed him to get his car repaired from the above agency, but has  not placed on record any document to support his claim. The Op no.1 repudiated the claim of the complainant on 28.02.2017  as per the surveyor's report that at the time of driving  licence  number PB-1320070026892 of Mr. Amandeep Singh Gill on dated 06.08.2007 valid for class of vehicle MCWG/LMV-TRACTOR-NT/LMVGV/LMV-CAB & now MCWG & Tractor falls in the category of Non Transport vehicles which is valid  upto 05.08.2027 & LMV-GV/LMV-CAB falls in transport category which is valid upto 29.08.2015. So the driving license is not valid for the car. So the competent authority has repudiated the claim as “No Claim” as per the recommendation of the surveyor. As per the affidavit filed by OP number 1, the OP number 1 again deputed the surveyor to physically inspect the vehicle in question after its repairs and assessed Rs.81,015/- as loss after deducting Rs.1000/- regarding excess clause and also assessed Rs.2000/- as salvage value and submitted his report to the OP number 1 on 05.01.2017 subject to the term and conditions of the policy.

 

7.             The Ops have placed on record the judgment in the case titled as Oriental Insurance Company Limited versus Mekh Chand and others 2012(3) PLR 37 (Punjab and Haryana High Court), wherein it has been held that if a person possesses a valid driving license for driving a car/scooter, it cannot be taken to be one for the tractor – Special endorsement is required on the license to the driver the tractor as well. Further as per the law laid down in the case titled as National Insurance Company Limited versus Baljit Kaur and others 2017(4) PLR 369, the insurance company contended that the driver of the offending vehicle did not have a license to drive a tractor trolly and was holding a license to drive a scooter and the car only. It cannot be taken to be one for the tractor- the driver did not have the requisite license. Ratio of these cases is fully applicable to the facts of the present case as discussed in detail above and as such, the complaint of the consumer is not maintainable.

 

8.             In view of our above discussion, we dismiss the complaint of the complainant. However, the parties are left to bear their own costs. A copy of this order be issued to the parties free of cost. File be consigned to records.

                Pronounced.

                                April 15, 2019.

                                                                                       

                                                 (Vinod Kumar Gulati)

                                                   Presiding Member

 

 

 

                                                        (Manisha)

                                                         Member