Karnataka

StateCommission

A/2278/2016

The Branch Manager, - Complainant(s)

Versus

Ravindra - Opp.Party(s)

H.N. Keshava Prashanth

18 Mar 2024

ORDER

Date of Filing:14.09.2016

Date of Disposal:18.03.2024

 

BEFORE THE KARNATAKA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BENGALURU (PRINCIPAL BENCH)

 

DATED:18.03.2024

 

PRESENT

 

HON’BLE Mr JUSTICE HULUVADI G RAMESH : PRESIDENT

 

Mr K BSANGANNANAVAR: JUDICIAL MEMBER

 

Mrs DIVYASHREE M:LADY MEMBER

 

 

APPEAL No.2278/2016

 

The Branch Manager,
M/s Universal Sompo General

Insurance Co Ltd.,

Ramson Complex, 2nd Floor,

P B Road, Hubli.

Now rep. by its Manager,

Corporate Office,

Plot No. EL 94,

TTC Industrial Area,

MIDC, Mahape,

Navi Mumbai-400 710                                                        Appellant

(By Mr H N Keshava Prashanth, Advocate)

 

                                                        

-Versus-

 

Mr Ravindra
S/o Mr Mallikarjun Kobri

Aged about 32 years,

Occ:Business,

R/o:Bagalkot.                                                                      Respondent

(By Mr L N Miskin, Advocate)

 

:ORDER:

 

Mr JUSTICE HULUVADI G RAMESH : PRESIDENT

 

1.       This Appeal is filed under Section 15 of Consumer Protection Act 1986 by the OP, aggrieved by the Order dated 27.04.2016 passed in Consumer Complaint No.96/2013 on the file of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Bagalkot (hereinafter referred to as the District Forum).

2.       Heard the arguments of the learned Counsels on record.

3.       Perused the Impugned Order, grounds of Appeal, documents on record and secured records of the District Forum.

4.       The District Forum after enquiring into the matter, allowed the Complaint in part, directing the OPs to pay Rs.1,74,000/- as compensation towards damage caused to the vehicle with interest @9 % p.a from 05.11.2013 till realisation. Further directed the OPs to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards mental agony and Rs.5,000/- as litigation costs to the Complainant within two months from the date of the Order, failing which, the said amount carry interest @12% p a. from 05.11.2013 till realisation.

5.       Aggrieved by this Order, OP is in Appeal inter-alia contending amongst other grounds that, the District Forum erred in coming to the conclusion that, the Cheque was not presented to the Bank, based on the endorsement produced by the Complainant.   The District Forum ought to have taken note of the fact that the documents produced by the Appellant herein, which is marked as Ex-OP3 before the District Forum clearly demonstrates that the Cheque  presented to the Bank and the same was returned with an endorsement ‘signature required in CBS system’ and hence finding of the District Forum, that the Appellant herein has not presented the Cheque to the Bank for encashment, is nothing but perverse finding and not based on proper appreciation of the evidence and documents produced.  Thus seeks to set aside the Impugned Order by allowing the Appeal.

6.       It is an admitted fact that Complainant is the owner of Maruti Swift Car bearing Registration No.KA-29A-2818; Comprehensive Insurance Policy was obtained for the period from 27.12.2011 to midnight of 26.12.2012 from OP by paying the stipulated Annual Premium of Rs.15,637/- by way of Cheque bearing No.33457 dated 25.12.2011 drawn on State Bank of Mysore, Bagalkot Branch.  It is also not in dispute, that OP issued the Policy Cover Note with Policy Certificate No.2314/51947227/00/000 and on 03.01.2012 the vehicle met with an accident near Kagal Village, Kothapur District, Maharashtra and vehicle got extensively damaged and the Complainant on his part, intimated about it to the OP got moved the vehicle for repair with M/s Shantesh Motors Pvt. Ltd., Belagavi and  Sri Ravi M Udikeri, the Value Assessor who examined the vehicle and assessed the damage caused to the vehicle at Rs.1,73,019/-, however, the Complainant had to pay a Sum of Rs 3,11,242/- as repair charges. 

7.       The stand taken by the OP for repudiation of the claim is that the policy issued in respect of the vehicle bearing No.KA-29A-2818 was Cancelled, due to non-receipt of the premium amount as void-ab-initio as the Premium amount paid by way of Cheque got returned from the Banker with remarks as ‘signature required in CBS system’. Further taken a defense that, the Complainant has submitted a false Claim of Rs.3,11,242/- spent towards repair of vehicle and further denied the endorsement issued by the Bank.

8.       No doubt, Complainant had submitted a Cheque bearing No. 33457 drawn on State Bank of Mysore Bagalkot Branch for Rs.15,637/-  dated 25.12.2011 towards the Annual Premium for the Insurance coverage to the OP and subsequently, OP issued a Cover Note with Policy to the Complainant. The crux of the matter is whether the Cheque for Rs.15,637/- issued by the Complainant was presented to the Bank for realisation by OP or not? Whether OP has committed deficiency in service in not honouring the Claim of the Complainant?

9.       On perusal of the document Ex-C-10 is the letter of OP dated 25.01.2012, wherein, OP stated that ‘the cheque dated 25.01.2012 was dishonoured’. Further, the document Ex C13, the Endorsement dated 19.10.2012 of State Bank of Mysore, Bagalkot Branch clearly goes to show that OP had not presented the said Cheque to the Bank and after knowing about the accident and damage caused to the vehicle,  repudiated the Claim of the Complainant stating that the cheque has been dishonoured for escaping his liability. Further, on perusal of the the bank statement produced by the Complainant/Respondent herein, it is seen that as on 09.01.2012, the balance reflected as Rs.17,305/- and Rs.58,305/- on 21.01.2012 that itself proves that as on the date of issuance of the cheque to the insurer, complainant has maintained sufficient balance for honouring the cheque, whenever presented for realisation. Further, OP neither intimate the complainant about the banker’s endorsement not obtain clarification to that effect from the insured or obtained fresh cheque which definitely amounts to deficiency in service on the part of OP. In the circumstances, the finding recorded by the District Forum is just and proper and the same does not call for any interference.  Accordingly, Appeal is Dismissed with no order as to costs.

10.     The Statutory Deposit in this Appeal is directed to be transferred to the District Commission for further needful.

11.     Return the LCR forthwith to the District Commission.

 

 

12.     Send a copy of this Order to the District Commission, as well as to the parties concerned, immediately.

 

Lady Member                      Judicial Member                       President

*s

 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.