Haryana

Karnal

638/11

Vipin Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

Oriental Insurance Company - Opp.Party(s)

Sh. S.S. Moonak

07 Sep 2015

ORDER

THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM KARNAL.

 

                                                          Complaint No.638 of 2011

                                                               Date of instt. 10.10.2011

                                                               Date of decision: 29.10.2015.

 

Vipin Kumar son of Shri Samay Singh resident of house No.350, Suraj Nagar, (Opp.Sugar Mill), Meerut Road, Karnal.

                                                   ……….Complainant.

                             Versus

 

The Oriental Insurance Company through its Branch Manager, GT Road, Karnal.

                                                           ……… Opposite party.

 

                     Complaint U/s  12  of the Consumer

                     Protection Act.

 

Before          Sh.K.C.Sharma……. President.

                   Sh.Anil Sharma ………Member.

                   Smt.Shashi Sharma…..Member.     

 

 Present:       Sh.S.S.Moonak Advocate for the complainant.

                   Sh.Suresh Khanna Advoate for the OP.

ORDER:

 

                        This complaint has been filed by the complainant u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 on the averments that  he got insured his Tata Ace bearing registration No. HR-45A-3798  from the Opposite Party ( in short OP), vide insurance policy No. 261301/31/2011/3383  valid from 01.2.2011 to 31.01.2012.  In the month of August, 2011, the said vehicle met with an accident near village Shamgarh due to which  the vehicle was damaged extensively .The vehicle was got  repaired at Karnal and a sum  of Rs.20,000/- was spent on the repairs .Apart from that  Rs.5000/- were  spent on incidental charges. The factum of accident was brought to the notice of OP, who appointed  surveyor. Necessary claim form was submitted and the OP, got conducted the investigations.  However, the complainant was told verbally by the officials of the OP that  the claim was  repudiated, but no written communication was sent to him. There was deficiency in services and unfair trade practice on the part of the OP, which caused mental pain and agony to the complainant apart from financial loss.

 

2.                Notice of the complaint was given the OP, who appeared and filed written statement disputing the claim of the complainant. Objections have been raised that complaint is not maintainable in the present form; that the complainant has concealed the material facts from this Forum and that this Forum has no jurisdiction  to entertain and try the present complaint.

                   On merits, the factum of accident has been disputed. It has been submitted that the complainant had already taken benefit of  “No claim bonus” from the OP on the basis of “No claim” on the policy taken from Reliance General Insurance Co.  so the benefits under the policy had been forfeited as per Motor  Tariff GR- 27.  The claim of the complainant had already been declared “No Claim” and repudiated vide registered letter dated 25.10.2011. The other allegations made in the complaint have been denied.

3.                In evidence of the complainant, his affidavit Ex.C1 and documents Ex.C2 to Ex.C8 have been tendered.

 

4.                On the other hand in evidence of the OP, affidavit of Shri B.P.Bhardwaj, Branch Manager and documents Ex.O1 to Ex.O6 have been tendered.

 

5.                We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the case file very carefully.

 

6.                The vehicle of the complainant was insured with the OP for the period  of 1.2.2011 to 31.1.2012. As per the case of the complainant, the vehicle met with an accident  in August, 2011. He got the same repaired at Karnal and spent Rs.20000/- on repairs and Rs.5000/- on incidental charges. The claim of the complainant was repudiated by the OP on the ground that he had already taken benefit of “No claim bonus” from OP on the basis of  “no claim”  on the previous policy taken from Reliance General Insurance Company Limited.

 

7.                  The main plank of the OP is Ex.O3, letter sent by the Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd. according to which the complainant was  enjoying 20% “no claim bonus” against cover note no.10900121 3944 but he had  reported the claim against the same. In the said letter, it was  not made clear as to whether any claim was paid or not to the complainant, during the period of the policy, which was valid  from  4.2.2010 to 3.2.2011. As per the letter Ex.O4  of Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd. the policy of the aforesaid cover note was issued on 4.3.2010. Thus, the main question which arises for consideration is whether the complainant had obtained claim from Reliance General Insurance   Co. Ltd.,  with whom his vehicle was previously insured, before getting the same insured from OP.

 

8.                          The complainant produced the copy of cover note  Ex.C7   and copy of  status of the policy Ex.C8 by way of additional evidence which  show that  the complainant had lodged claim before the Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd. with regard to loss of his vehicle on 11.3.2010, but  the said claim was repudiated. This evidence of the complainant has gone completely unrebutted and there is no reason to disbelieve the same. Thus, it is emphatically clear that complainant had not received any claim from the Reliance General Insurance Co. Limited before getting his vehicle insured with the OP. Therefore, repudiation of his claim by the OP was not legally justified. The complainant has produced bills Ex.C5 and Ex.C6 for total amount of Rs.19420/- regarding repairs of his vehicle. Therefore, he is entitled to get reimbursed the said amount from the OP.

 

9.                As a sequel to the foregoing discussion, we accept the present complaint and direct the OP to make the payment of Rs.19420/- to the complainant alongwith interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the present complaint i.e.10.10.2011 till its actual realization. The complainant shall also be entitled for a sum of Rs.10000/- for the mental agony and harassment caused to him and for litigation expenses. The OP shall make the compliance of  this  order within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. The parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced
dated:29.10.2015                                                                            

                                                                (K.C.Sharma)

                                                                   President,

                                                         District Consumer Disputes

                                                          Redressal Forum, Karnal.

 (Anil Sharma)       (Smt.Shashi Sharma)    

   Member.                             Member.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Present:        Sh.S.S.Moonak Advocate for the complainant.

                   Sh.Suresh Khanna Advoate for the OP.

 

                   Arguments heard. Vide our separate order of the even date, the present complaint has been accepted. The parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

 

Announced
dated:29.10.2015                                                                            

                                                              (K.C.Sharma)

                                                                   President,

                                                         District Consumer Disputes

                                                          Redressal Forum, Karnal.

 (Anil Sharma)       (Smt.Shashi Sharma)    

   Member.                             Member.

 

 

 

.