By. Smt. Saji Mathew, Member:-
The gist of the case is as follows:- The complainant's father purchased one Maruthi Swift VDI car bearing Registered No. KL 12 D 7656, 2009 model. The car was insured with 1st opposite party under policy No.D13A1244028 issued on 27.08.2009. At the time of purchase, the 3rd opposite party compelled the insured to take policy from the 1st opposite party since they have corporate tie up with them and in case of any claim they would allow cashless settlement.
2. Complainant's father met with an accident on 28.09.2009. He was admitted in intensive care unit and thereafter died on 18.10.2009 due to serious injuries sustained in the accident. The complainant filed claim form with all relevant documents at the end of March 2010.
3. On enquiry about the claim the 1st opposite party said that the same was under process. Then the opposite party asked for legal heir certificate. On producing legal heir certificate, they again demanded for submitting fresh claim form with relevant documents. The complainant again submitted claim form on 06.04.2011. Even then, the 1st opposite party not decided on the claim till this date. Therefore the complainant prays for an order directing the opposite parties to pay sum of Rs.2,00,000/- to the complainant with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from 01.03.2010 and compensation of Rs.1,00,000/-.
4. The opposite party No.1 has not appeared before the Forum. Hence the case was
decided exparte as far as opposite party No.1 is concerned. Opposite party No.2 filed version and stated that there was a policy No.MP50148547000100 regarding car No. KL 12 D 7656 and submitted that own damage claim of the vehicle was settled by the opposite parties. But the complainant has never made any claim for owner driver personnel accident cover for death of Mr. Vasanth Kumar. M.C till this date. So there is no question of processing or allowing the claim. So this opposite party prays for an order dismissing the complaint.
5. The 3rd opposite party filed version and stated that they are unnecessary party to the case. They have never compelled the complainant's father to insure the car with the 1st opposite party. The 3rd opposite party is not aware of the death of the complainant's father or the claim before the 1st opposite party regarding it. There is no deficiency in service on the side of the opposite party No.3. They pray for an order dismissing the complaint.
6. The complainant filed proof affidavit and documents were marked as Exts.A1 to A10. No evidence was adduced by opposite party No.2 or opposite party No.3.
7. The matters to be decided are:-
1. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the side of the opposite parties?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled for any relief?
8. Point No.1:- Opposite party No.1 admits the policy regarding the car KL 12 D 7656. The case of opposite party No.1 is that no claim is made for owner-driver personal accident cover for death of Mr. Vasanth Kumar. Opposite parties have not adduced any evidence. They have not even cross examined or denied the contentions raised in the proof affidavit of the complainant. So the case of the complainant is taken as true and Point No.1 is found against the opposite party No.1.
9. Point No.2:- Ext.A3 is the policy in the name of Sri. Vasanth Kumar. M.C regarding the case. It shows that the claim for death of owner-driver is two lakhs. Ext.A7 is the death certificate. Ext.A8 is the Postmortem Certificate and Ext.A10 is Legal Heir Certificate. Opposite party No.1 is liable to pay this amount to the legal heirs of the policy holder.
Hence the opposite party No.1 is directed to pay Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Only) to the legal heirs of policy holder including the complainant with interest at the rate of 10% per annum from the date of this order till payment. No Order as to cost or compensation. This Order is to be complied within 30 days from the receipt of this Order.
Pronounced in Open Forum on this the day of 7th March 2012.
Date of Filing:26.08.2011.
