BEFORE THE KARNATAKA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BENGALURU (ADDL. BENCH)
DATED THIS THE 23rd DAY OF OCTOBER 2024
PRESENT
MR. RAVISHANKAR : JUDICIAL MEMBER
MRS. SUNITA CHANNABASAPPA BAGEWADI : MEMBER
APPEAL NO. 1568/2017
The Oriental Insurace Complainant. Ltd., Divisional Office, #1. CSIM Thejas Complex, 1st Floor, Sayyaji Rao Road, Mysuru – 570001. ( By Smt. B.S.Padmaja, Advocate) | …Appellant/s |
V/s
1. | Smt. Yashoda, W/o. Sri. Rachachari, Aged anout 55 years. | |
2. | Smt. Shanta K.R, W/o. Sri Lokesh. K.P. Aged about 43 years. Respondents No.1 and 2 are residing at 304, opp. KHB Colony, Hunsur main road, Hootagalli, Mysuru – 570018. | |
3. | Smt. Shantha. K.R, W/o. Sri. Lokesh. K.P. Aged about 40 years, Residing at #1521, 3rd Cross, New Post Office, Guthalu Colony, Mandya. ( By Sri. Gaurav G.K, Advocate) | …Respondent/s |
O R D E R
BY SRI.RAVISHANKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER
The appeal is filed by the Appellant/Opposite Party against the order dated 23.06.2017 passed in CC.No.1055/2016 on the file of Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Mysore which directed this appellant to pay an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- with 12% interest under personal accident and Rs.45,000/- under own damage claim and Rs.25,000/- towards compensation along with Rs.10,000/- towards deficiency in service and Rs.5,000/- towards litigation expenses and submits that the deceased Mr. K.R Ramesh had obtained a vehicle policy towards his motorbike registration No.#KA-11-EB-5016. When such being the case, he died due to accident on 17.03.2015 which collided with KSRTC Bus. The complainants being legal representatives had claimed for compensation under personal accident benefit and also claimed own damage claim. But, the claim was repudiated by this appellant for the reason that at the time of accident, the insured/deceased Mr. K.R Ramesh was intoxicated and he was riding his Motor Bike under the influence of alcohol hence, this appellant shown their inability to settle the claim. Aggrieved by the same, the complainant approached the District Commission alleging deficiency in service and sought for compensation by virtue of the policy.
2. The District Commission after trial allowed the complaint and directed this appellant to pay the above said amount. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant before this Commission.
3. Heard - Perused the certified copy of the order and memorandum of appeal, we noticed that the District Commission after accepting the evidences and documents from both the parties had allowed the complaint and directed this appellant to pay above said amount. The District Commission also relied upon the citation of Hon’ble National Commission, Delhi in Revision Petition 2433/2007 and given opinion that the cause of accident was not due to alcohol intoxication. There was no rash and negligence against the deceased insured. It is only a KSRTC Bus who has dashed the Motor Bike due to which the insured was died hence, allowed the complaint.
4. Ofcourse, we agree with opinion given by District Commission. At the time of accident, the complainant only consumed alcohol and he was not intoxicated. Mere consumption of alcohol does not amounts to intoxication. The level of alcohol concentration if it exceeds 86-25mg/100ml, then only it is considered that the person was intoxicated. Here, it is an admitted fact that as per the report, the deceased was under the influence of consumption of alcohol upto 36-46mg/100ml. Therefore, we also consider that the insured at the time of accident had only consumed alcohol and not intoxicated and he had not violated any terms and conditions of the policy. The complainants are legally entitled to get compensation by virtue of the policy. The grounds urged before this Commission are not satisfactory. The repudiation made by this appellant is not justifiable. Accordingly,
O R D E R
The appeal is dismissed. No order as to cost.
The amount in deposit shall be transmitted to the concerned District Consumer Commission to pay the same to the complainant.
Send a copy of this order to both parties as well as concerned District Consumer Commission.
(Sunita .C. Bagewadi) (Ravishankar)
Member Judicial Member
vs*
