This is a complaint U/S 12 of the C. P. Act, 1986 with the prayer for an order directing the O.P. to pay the cost of damage of 3,00,000/- along with compensation of 25,000/- together with litigation cost of 5,000/- and other relieves.

The complaint in short is that one Sadhan Sarkar purchased a vehicle bearing No. WB-59A/1073 and the same vehicle insured under the O.P. company, being policy No.313501/31/2012/3324, sum assured of 3,00,000/- only, valid from 21.08.2011 to 20.08.2012. This vehicle met with an accident on 12.06.2012 within the valid period of the insurance policy. After that accident the complainant lodged complaint before the O.P. He submitted all documents for getting repairing cost of the damage vehicle but O.P. did not turn up. The damage vehicle but the O.P. did not turn up. So, finding no other alternative to get relief from the insurer the complainant has filed this case.

The O.P. has contested the case by filing W.V. denying all the allegation made by the complainant against him rather contended that the case is not maintainable in its present form and law. His specific case is that at the time of accident the aforesaid vehicle of the complainant was not fit at all, as a result said accident was occurred. Due to that reason O.P. insurer repudiated his claim. So, the insurer is not guilty of any deficiency in service and as such the present complaint is liable to be dismissed with cost.

To establish the case the complainant has relied upon an affidavit-in-chief sworn by him, his own statement recorded as statement of P.W.1 and some documents which have not been challenged by the O.P. in their W.V. and also by adducing any evidence.

DECISIONS WITH REASONS

          Carefully considering the contents of the petition of complaint, W.V., documentary evidence on record and arguments advanced by the Ld. Lawyers of both the parties, the Ld. Forum has come to the findings as follows –

          It is admitted fact that one policy being No.313501/31/2012/3922 was issued by the O.P./ insurer in connection with the vehicle of the complainant bearing No. WB-59A/1073 for the period from 21.08.2011 to 20.08.2012. The said vehicle met with an accident on 12.06.2012 with the valid period of insurance policy. The letter dated 13.06.2012 issued by the complainant to the O.P. shows that just after one day of the aforesaid accident the complainant gave intimation for claiming damage before the O.P.

It has been revealed from the W.V. that the O.P. repudiated the claim of the complaint on the ground that at the time of accident on 12.06.2012 the aforesaid vehicle has no fitness certificate. ‘Fitness Certificate’ of the vehicle filed by the complainant also shows that the certificate of fitness of the aforesaid vehicle expired on 03.03.2012. But it has been revealed from the Accidental Inspection Report dated 15.06.2012 by Mechanical-in-charge, NBSTC, Raiganj vide Reference Raiganj P.S.  13/12 dated 12.06.2012 that as per opinion of the Mechanical-in-charge, the damages of the aforesaid vehicle were post accidental and the said accident took place due to other than Mechanical failure. The copy of the FIR also supported the above statement that at the time of accident, the said vehicle was standing on the left side of the road and accident was occurred in collision with one vehicle in running condition from back side. So, considering the above documents it may presume that the vehicle was fit.

It also found from the above Accidental Inspection Report dated 15.06.2012 that all most all the body, gear box, break pipes, back lights (both), both  with him, differential tube, propelar shaft and rear both sides spring sets were in badly damage of the aforesaid vehicle of the complainant. And we see from the bill vouchers as repairing charge of the said vehicle filed by the complainant shows that total of 3,72,135/- was spend by the complainant to repair the above damaged vehicle.    The copy of the policy being No. 313501/31/2012/3922 shows that the sum assured at 3,00,000/- only as mentioned in the said policy. So, the complainant can claim only 3,00,000/- as damage claim of as the aforesaid vehicle out of actual cost of 3,72,135/-.

In view of the above discussions, the complaint case succeeds.

Fees paid are correct.

Hence, it is

ordered,

          that the complaint case being No.82/2012 is allowed on contest with cost, accordingly the complainant do get an order of award for 3,00,000/- as damage claimed along with interest @ 6.5% on claimed money on and from the filing of this case till the date of realization, compensation of 2,000/- and litigation cost of 1,000/-. The O.Ps. are directed to pay the entire amount as mentioned above within one month from this day, failing which the complainant will be at liberty to realize his claim in accordance with law.

Furnish the true photocopies of this Final order to the parties free of cost.