Date of filing : 29.04.2015
Date of S/R : 01.07.2015
Date of Order : 21.12.2015
Biswajit Ghosh,
Vill. & P.O.- Benga, P.S.- Goghat,
Hooghly Bengai,
Goghat-712611……………….…………….………………………….Complainant.
- Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd.,
49, Dobson Road, 2nd floor, Near A.C. Market,
P.S. Golabari, District Howrah,
PIN 711 101.
- Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd.,
Regd. Office Reliance Centre,
19, Walchand Hirachand Marg, ]
Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400 001.
- Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd.,
8th floor, Himalaya House,
38B. J. L. Nehru Road,
Kolkata-700 071.
- Mohan Motor Business Pvt. Ltd.,
Mohan Gardens , Arupota,
Opp. Science City,
Kolkata-700105………………………………………………. Opposite Parties.
P R E S E N T
Hon’ble President : Shri B. D. Nanda, M.A. ( double ), L.L.M., WBHJS.
Hon’ble Member : Smt. Jhumki Saha.
Hon’ble Member : Shri A.K. Pathak .
F I N A L O R D E R
This is an application U/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, filed by the Petitioner, Shri Biswajit Ghosh against the O.P.s Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd. and 3 others , praying for direction upon the O.P.s to reimburse the consideration of claim amount being Rs. 5,00,000/- with interest @ 18% till realization and also to pay him compensation for sum of Rs. 3,00,0,000/- for physical harassment and mental agony and Rs. 20,000/- as litigation cost.
The case of the petitioner is that he had a cashless insurance policy of the company of the O.P. valid from 04.06.2014 to 03.06.2015 and he regularly paid the premium of the policy where the sum assured was Rs.4,97,597/- and the premium amount was Rs. 16,000/- and his vehicle being Mahindra/Bolero Plus AC BSIII was under the policy coverage . On 25.12.2014 the petitioner and his family members proceed towards ‘Digha’ in the said car and faced with an accident near Mahishgoat Bus Stand and the vehicle was severely damaged. P.S. case was started being 494/2014 dated 27.12.2014 and the mechanical report showing the accident occurs due to other than mechanical failure and the car was sent to Mohan Motor Workshop for repair and the claim was placed before the Insurance Company as per estimate of O.P. No. 4, Mohan Motors, and after the filing of claim the O.P. 5 the surveyor of the company demanded copy of FIR of the petitioner but on 28.02.2015 the O.P. company sent a letter repudiating the claim on the ground that the driver of the vehicle was under the influence of liquor at the relevant time. The O.P. Mohan Motors claimed charges @ Rs. 250/- per day as the car was lying in the workshop. The O.P. Insurance Company created an unfair trade practice and deficiency in service and made out a fake excuse which be rejected by the Forum and allow the claim of the petitioner as prayed for.
The O.P.s 1 to 3 being the Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd though served with notice did not appear in the case and only O.P. No. 4 appeared but the petitioner took back his vehicle from the workshop of O.P. No. 4 as per order of the Forum. The o.p. no. 4 then did not turn up before the Forum and so the case is heard ex parte against all the O.Ps.
The only point is decided here is whether the petitioner is entitled to get the relief as prayed for ?
Decision with reason
In support of his case the petitioner , Biswajit Ghosh. filed affidavit as well as documents connecting his ownership of vehicle as well as the FIR , seizure list etc. connecting the GR. Case 1692/2014 that the vehicle faced with an accident wherein the vehicle was severely damaged. It is noticed from the repudiation letter filed by the petitioner that the O.P. repudiated the claim on the ground that at the relevant time of driving vehicle the driver of the vehicle was under the influence of liquor of drug which is in violence of the policy wordings. Ld. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the MVI opined that the cause of accident was other that mechanical failure of the vehicle and from nowhere it could be found that the driver was under influence of the liquor. The O.P. neither appeared nor filed any written version stating that the driver was under the influence of liquor and so they never rightly repudiate the claim . In their letter dated 28.02.2015 they stated in para II that it was confirmed that the driver was under the influence of liquor. Neither any oral nor documentary evidence coming before the o.p. to prove the above facts and on the other hand the petitioner proved the case that there was accident and the vehicle was severely damaged and the vehicle was under the valid insurance policy under the O.P. insurance Co. So the petitioner successfully proved his case exparte against the O.p. No. 1, 2 and 3. The claim of O.P. No. 4 is not considered in this case and he has to approach proper Forum separately for satisfying his demand.
In view of above discussion and findings the case of the petitioner succeeds .
Court fees paid is correct.
Hence,
Ordered,
That the Consumer Case No. 162/2015 be and the same is allowed ex parte against the O.P. 12, 2 and 3 with cost and dismissed against O.P. 4 without cost.
The petitioner is entitled to get the relief as prayed for.
The O.P. No. 1, 2 and 3 are directed to pay the insured sum or the actual repair cost of the vehicle to the petitioner whichever is less and also the O.P. is to pay compensation for a sum of Rs. 1,00,000 for physical and mental harassment and Rs. Rs. 10,000/- as litigation cost within 30 days from the date of order failing the petitioner would be at liberty to put the order in execution and also the awarded sum would carry interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the case till realization .
Supply the copy of the order to the parties, free of cost.
Dictated and corrected by me.
( B. D. Nanda)
President, C.D.R.F. Howrah.
