Andhra Pradesh

Visakhapatnam-II

CC/200/2013

Pothina Narasimha Naidu - Complainant(s)

Versus

Reliance General Insurance co., Ltd., - Opp.Party(s)

M. Satyanarayana

07 Jan 2015

ORDER

 Reg.of the Complaint:29-07-2013

                                                                                                                                 Date of Order:07-01-2015

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMERS FORUM-II

AT VISAKHAPATNAM

                   Present:

1.Sri H.ANANDHA RAO, M.A., L.L.B.,

       President

2.Sri C.V.RAO, M.A., B.L.,

                                             Male Member

3.Smt.K.SAROJA, M.A., B.L.,

       Lady Member

                                            

 

WEDNESDAY, THE 7^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2015

CONSUMER CASE NO.200/2013

 

BETWEEN:

SRI POTHINA NARASIMHA NAIDU @ NAIDU BABU

S/O LATE APPA RAO, HINDU, AGED 45 YEARS,

D.NO.1-40, POTHINA MALLAYYAPALEM, VISAKHAPATNAM-41.

…COMPLAINANT

AND:

1.RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO., LTD.,

REP., BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY,

SITUATED AT D.NO.47-14-5 (403),

3^RD FLOOR, ESWAR PARADISE, DWARAKANAGAR,

MAIN ROAD, VISAKHAPATNAM-530 016.

 

2.THE GRIEVANCE REDRESSAL OFFICER,

RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO., LTD.,

570 NAIGUAM CROSS ROAD,

NEXT TO ROYAL INDUSTRIAL ESTATE,

WADALA WEST, MUMBAI-400 031.

…OPPOSITE PARTIES

This case coming on 23-12-2014 for final hearing before us in the presence of SRI M.SATYANARAYANA, Advocate for the Complainant, and of SRI D.SIVA PRASAD, Advocate for the 1^st OP, and the 2^nd OP, being set exparte, and having stood over till this date for consideration, this Forum made the following.

ORDER

 (As per SMT.K.SAROJA, Honourable Lady Member on behalf of the Bench)

1. The case of the complainant in brief is that the complainant is the owner of the Car bearing Registration No. AP 31 BT 0009 and while the policy was in force, the complainant’s vehicle met with an accident dated 20-03-2013. The complainant after observing the formalities and getting assessed the damage preferred insurance claim at Rs.3,30,000/- as per the estimation given by Leela Krishna Toyota Automobiles, Visakhapatnam. But, the OP repudiated the claim of the complainant as the driver was under influence of alcohol at the time of the accident of the said vehicle. Then the complainant issued legal notice dated 21-06-2013  stating that the driver of the vehicle was not under influence of alcohol and the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the Auto involved in the said accident.  The 2^nd OP received the lawyer’s notice but did not settle the claim of the complainant nor gave any reply to the said notice. Hence, this complaint.

1. For a sum of Rs.3,30,000/- (Rupees Three Lakhs Thirty Three  Thousand only) with interest at 24% p.a., thereon from 23-4-2013 the date of complainant’s claim made to all the Opposite Parties  till the date of payment;
2. For a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) towards damages for the period from the above said date i.e., 23-4-2013 at the rate of Rs.25,000/-(Rupees twenty five thousand only) with interest @ 24% p.a., from the date of complainant’s claim till date of payment;
3. For a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- ( Rupees One Lakh only) towards compensation for the inconvenience, mental agony, damages, and suffering caused to the complainant;
4. For a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) towards costs of the complaint;
5. For such other relief/reliefs as the Honourable Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

1. The 2^nd OP did not resist the claim of the complainant as it was set exparte remained exparte.
2. The 1^st OP strongly resisted the claim of the complainant by contending as can be seen from its counter, the first OP received information from the complainant on 24-04-2013 as the vehicle met with an accident on 20-03-2013. The 1^st OP appointed a surveyor and who assessed the loss at Rs.1,91,000/-. As per the case records, like FIR, Charge Sheet and MVI Report, the vehicle belongs to the complainant met with an accident on 20-03-2013. The OP repudiated the claim of the complainant as per the policy condition No.1 under influence of alcohol. So, the OP has no liability to pay  any reliefs asked by the complainant.

4.       At the time of enquiry, both parties filed Evidence Affidavits as well as written arguments to support their contentions. Exhibits A1 to A8 and Exhibits B1 to B7 are marked for either side. Heard both sides.

          Exhibit A1 is Leelakrishna Automobiles Estimation Report, dated 02-04-2013, Exhibit A2 is the Letter from 2^nd OP given to the Complainant dated 10-06-2013, Exhibit A3 is the Reply Notice from the complainant to the 2^nd OP dated 21-06-2013, Exhibit A4 is the Postal Acknowledgement from 2^nd OP dated 26-06-2013, Exhibit A5 is the Tax Invoice issued from Toyota Showroom to the Complainant dated 29-06-2013, Exhibit A6 is the Insurance Policy copy dated 09-10-2013, Exhibit A7 is the Certificate of Registration of the vehicle dated 24-11-2011, Exhibit A8 is Bunch of Bills issued by Leelakrishna Toyota from 21-06-2013 to 27-06-2013.

          Exhibit  B1 is the Reliance Private Car Vehicle Certificates cum Policy Schedule, Exhibit B2 is the terms and conditions of the policy, Exhibit B3 is the FIR, Exhibit B4 is the Statement of B.Naga Raju, Exhibit B5 is the statement of K.Siva Prasad, Exhibit B6 is the Accident Report from Motor Vehicles Inspector, Exhibit B7 is the Memorandum given by ACP., Madhurawada Sub-Division, Visakhapatnam City dated 29-01-2013.

5.       The fact shown from Exhibits A6 reveals that the complainant incurred Rs.3,30,000/- towards repairs for his vehicle which was met with an accident. Leela Krishna Toyota assessed loss and as per their estimation, the complainant paid the said amount.  The policy was in force at the time of accident, according to Exhibit B1 & A6.

6.       The point that would arise for determination is:

Whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of the OPs? if so, Whether the Complainant is entitled to the   reliefs asked for?

7.       After careful perusal of the case record, this forum finds that the accident is not in dispute. After intimation received by the complainant, the OP appointed a Surveyor and the surveyor assessed the loss to a tune of Rs.1,91,000/-. As such, the OPs are estopped from raising the plea now that there was a delay on the part of the complainant in reporting the matter of accident to them. The OPs also admitted the fact that the surveyor appointed by them.  According Exhibit A2, the OP repudiated the claim of the complainant mainly on the ground that “driver is under influence of alcohol”. But, the OP fails to produce any piece of evidence to show that the Driver was under influence of alcohol at the time of accident  of the said vehicle. The complainant incurrent/spent an amount of Rs.3,30,000/- as per Exhibit A5 for repairing of his vehicle. So, the repudiation of the claim of the complainant is illegal and also it amounts to gross deficiency in service on the part of the OPs. Hence, the complaint is entitled to Rs.3,30,000/- with interest, some compensation and costs too.

8.       In the result, the Complaint is allowed, directing the Opposite Parties 1 and 2: to pay an amount of Rs.3,30,000/- (Rupees Three Lakhs Thirty Thousand only) with 9% p.a., from 29-06-2013 till the date of actual realization, and to pay a compensation of Rs.35,000/- (Rupees Thirty Five Thousand only) and costs of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees two Thousand only) to the complainant.  Advocate fee is fixed at Rs.2,000/- (Rupees two thousand only). Time for compliance, one month from the date of this order.

Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by him, corrected and pronounced by us in the open Forum, on this the 7^th day of January, 2015.

 

  Sd/-                                                      Sd/-                                        Sd/-

M.MEMBER                                                     PRESIDENT                                                L.MEMBER  

 

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

Exhibits Marked for the Complainant:

Exhibits	Date	Description	Remarks
A-1	02-04-2013	Valuer’s Report	Original
A-2	10-06-2013	Letter from 2nd OP given to the Complainant dated 10-06-2013,	Original
A-3	21-06-2013	Reply Notice from the complainant to the 2nd OP	Office Copy
A-4	26-06-2013	Postal Acknowledgements from 2nd OP	Original
A-5	29-06-2013	Tax Invoice	Original
A-6	09-10-2012	Insurance Policy	Photostat copy
A-7	24-11-2011	Certificate of Registration	Photostat copy
A-8	21-06-2013 To 27-06-2013	Bunch of Bills	Original

 

Exhibits Marked for the OPs     -nil-

Exhibits	Date	Description	Remarks
B-1		Private Car vehicle certificate cum policy schedule	Original
B-2		Policy terms and conditions	Original
B-3	29-01-2013	FIR	Office Copy
B-4		Statement of B.Naga Raju	Photocopy
B-5		Statement of K.Siva Prasad	Photocopy
B-6		Accident Report	Photostat copy
B-7	29-01-2013	Office Memorandum from ACP., Madhurawada Sub-Division, Visakhapatnam City	Photostat copy

 

 

  Sd/-                                                     Sd/-                                         Sd/-

M.MEMBER                                                     PRESIDENT                                                L.MEMBER