Consumer Complaint No. 149 of 2016
Date of filing: 29.8.2016 Date of disposal: 02.01.2017
Complainant: Jay Narayan Singh, S/o. Late Shibnath Singh, resident of Rambagan, Punjabi More, Near ITI College, PO: Searsole Rajbari, PS: Raniganj, District: Burdwan, PIN – 713 358.
-V E R S U S-
Opposite Party: Reliance General Insurance Company Limited, having its office at 2nd Floor, Prabati shopping Arcade, G. T. Road (Mission More), Asansol, PS: Asansol (S), PIN – 713 303, West Bengal, represented by its Manager.
Present: Hon’ble President: Sri Asoke Kumar Mandal.
Hon’ble Member: Smt. Silpi Majumder.
Appeared for the Complainant: Ld. Advocate, Apurba Ghosh & Suvro Chakraborty.
Appeared for the Opposite Party: None.
J U D G E M E N T
This complaint is filed by the Complainant u/S. 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, alleging deficiency in service, as well as, unfair trade practice against the OP as the OP has repudiated his legitimate insurance claim illegally and improperly on whimsical pretext.
The brief fact of the case of the Complainant is that being the owner of the vehicle no-NL-01K-4083 he applied before the Registering Authority for using the same as a goods vehicle for hire and reward through various transporters after purchasing the same and it is the only source of living by means of self-employment. The said vehicle is under the insurance coverage which was valid for the period from 04.04.2014 to midnight 03.04.2015 issued by the OP. On 03.05.2014 at about 03.30 p.m. when the said truck was proceeding to Buxar at Thatti on Patna By-pass road at Khemni-chak, Hanuman Ganj by one efficient driver namely Subhas Yadav (DL no-WB-2019960033387) the said truck met an accident and as a result a woman namely Madhuri Devi sustained injury on her leg and for this reason one specific case was registered before Patrakar-Nagar Police Station vide no-96/2014 dated 03.05.2014. After the accident some local people set the truck on fire for which the vehicle got damage extremely and the said news was published in the daily newspaper namely Hindustan on 04.05.2014. The fact of the accident was duly reported to the insurer on the very same day of accident over telephone and getting release the vehicle the Complainant brought the same at the Punjabi More, Raniganj and as per instruction of the Insurance Company the Complainant submitted the claim form before the Company for damages of the vehicle. The Complainant paid a sum of Rs.6,77,080 to the Bhandari Automobiles Private Limited, Rs.1,82,000/- to Biswakarma Show Centre, Rs.850/- to Palco for repairing the damages of the truck and Rs.27,000/- to Rajesh & Brothers breakdown Service for towing and lifting the damaged vehicle from Patna to Raniganj. By issuing letter dated 30.08.2014 the Insurance Company had repudiated the claim of the Complainant stating a vague ground that Driving License was not valid to the driver for the subject class of vehicle and it was also advised that in case of dissatisfaction with such repudiation the Complainant can approach before the Insurance Ombudsman. Upon receipt of the repudiation letter the Complainant applied for the particulars of the driving license to the Licensing Authority for the driving license bearing no-WB-2019960033387 through the driver Subhas Yadav and from the said particulars it is observed that the driving license was valid up to 08.04.2015 (Transport) and up to 30.04.2015 (Non-Transport) and the class of the vehicle LMV (NT) and Transport vehicle M/HMV (Regid Chasis)-Goods. Upon receipt of the repudiation letter the Complainant approached before the Insurance Ombudsman and he received one letter dated 20.05.2015 from the Insurance Ombudsman and being dissatisfied with the attitude of the Insurance Ombudsman and having no alternative this complaint is filed by him for getting justice praying for direction upon the OP to pay a sum of Rs.8,86,930=00 towards the insurance coverage, Rs.7,00,000=00 as compensation due to loss of income, mental pain, agony, harassment and litigation cost of Rs.50,000=00 to him. The Complainant has also prayed for giving direction to the OP to make payment of interest @12% p.a. from 03.05.2014 till realization of the entire amount.
After admission of the complaint notice was issued by the office of this Ld. Forum upon the OP through speed post with A/D. Though the OP had received the notice but did not turn up to contest the complaint either by filing written version or orally. So this ld. Forum was pleased to fix for ex parte hearing.
On the date of final argument the Ld. Counsel for the Complainant was present, but the OP was absent on calls. The Complainant has adduced evidence on affidavit. We took up the argument ex parte against the OP.
We have carefully perused the record; several documents submitted by the Complainant and heard argument as advanced by the Ld. Counsel for the Complainant. It is seen by us that admittedly the vehicle of the Complainant was under an insurance coverage, insurance policy was obtained from the OP, the policy was valid for the period from 04.04.2014 to 03.04.2015, the insured vehicle was used as a goods vehicle on hire and reward basis through various transporters, on 03.05.2014 the insured vehicle met an accident, an FIR wa lodged, Police case started, due to accident the vehicle got damage extremely, on the date of accident the OP was intimated by the Complainant over telephone, the vehicle was driven by one driver namely Subhas Yadav having driving license no-WB-2019960033387, thereafter the vehicle was brought at Ranigunj, insurance claim was lodged, the Complainant had to bear several costs on different counts i.e. repairing, towing and lifting of the damaged vehicle and others, on 30.08.2014 the Insurance Company by issuing a letter had repudiated the claim of the Complainant on the ground that the driving license of the driver was not valid for the subject class of vehicle, the Insurance Company had mentioned in the said letter that in case of any dissatisfaction with such repudiation, the Complainant may approach before the Insurance Ombudsman, the Complainant approached accordingly, being dissatisfied with the opinion of the Ld. Ombudsman this complaint is filed by the Complainant praying for certain reliefs.
Be it mentioned that upon receipt of the repudiation letter the Complainant approached before the Licensing Authority by making an application for production of the extract of the driving license of Subhas Yadav which was under his possession at the time of accident, the Licensing Authority provided the same, from the extract it is evident that the questioned license is valid up to 08.04.2015 (Transport) and up to 30.04.2015 (Non-Transport), the class of the vehicle is mentioned as Light Motor Vehicle (NT) and Transport vehicle M/HMV (Regid Chasis) Goods.
Therefore, the dispute resolves within a very short compass as to whether the Complainant is entitled to get the insurance claim or not OR the Insurance Company had repudiated his insurance claim legally or arbitrarily. From the extract of the driving license of Mr. Subhas Yadav, who was driving the insured vehicle of the Complainant on the date of accident, it is revealed that the concerned driver possessed valid driving license in respect of Transport vehicle as well as Non-Transport vehicle. In respect of Transport vehicle the license is valid till 08.04.2015 and in case of Non-transport vehicle it is till 30.04.2025. In the said extract it is written under the column of class of vehicle held & endorsement details as ‘Light Motor vehicle Non-Transport WEF 11.01.1996 & Transport Vehicle M/HMV (Regid Chasis)-Goods WEF 11.01.1996’. The said extract of the driving license was issued by the Transport Department, 24 Parganas (South), Alipur, dated 28.11.2014. Being dissatisfied with the repudiation as mad by the Insurance Company the Complainant approached before the Insurance Ombudsman, but the office of the Ld. Ombudsman intimated the Complainant by issuing letter dated 20.05.2015 to send the details of the complaint along with the copies of all the documents in support of his grievance and full photocopy of the policy document within 10 days from the date of receipt of the said letter. Whether the Complainant provided the required documents to the office of the ld. Ombudsman or not within the stipulated period, the picture is not clear, but the Ld. Ombudsman did not repudiate the claim of the Complainant or failed to mitigate his grievance.
The OP had repudiated the claim of the Complainant on the ground that on the date of the accident the driver, drove the insured vehicle did not possess valid driving license for the subject vehicle. But the extract issued by the Transport Department is showing otherwise i.e. the driver hold valid driving license on the date of the accident on 03.05.2014. Not only that the said driver hold the driving license for LMV (Light Motor Vehicle), MMV (Medium Motor Vehicle) & HMV (Heavy Motor Vehicle). On the date of the accident the driver was on the steering of a Heavy Motor Vehicle, which he was entitled to drive, so it cannot be said based on the extract of the driving license of Mr. Yadav that he was no possessing valid driving license for the subject vehicle. So we can draw the conclusion that the OP-Insurance Company had repudiated the insurance claim of the Complainant illegally and arbitrarily, which denotes the deficiency in service on the part of the OP and for this reason the Complainant had to rush from pillar to post for redressal of his grievance and ultimately approached before this Ld. Forum praying for relief. Due to such deficient service of the OP, the OP is under obligation to pay compensation to the Complainant and as the Complainant seeking redressal has initiated this complaint before this ld. Forum incurring some expenses, hence in our opinion the Complainant is also entitled to get litigation cost from the OP.
Going by the foregoing discussion hence, it is
O r d e r e d
that the complaint is allowed ex parte against the OP with cost. The OP shall pay a sum of Rs.8, 86,930=00 (Rs. Eight lac eighty six thousand nine hundred and thirty) only to the Complainant towards repairing cost, towing and lifting charges, labour charges and purchase of Air Pipe etc. under the coverage of the insurance policy within 45 (forty five) days from the date of passing of this judgment, in default the abovementioned amount shall carry interest @8% (eight per cent) per annum for the default period. The OP is further directed to pay Rs.3, 000=00 (Rs. Three thousand) only as compensation due to harassment, mental pain and agony and Rs.1, 000=00 (Rs. One thousand) only as litigation cost to the Complainant within 45 (forty five) days from the date of passing of this judgment, in default, the Complainant will be at liberty to put the entire decree in execution as per provision of law.
Let plain copies of this order be supplied to the parties free of cost as per provisions of Consumer Protection Regulations, 2005.
(Asoke Kumar Mandal)
Dictated and corrected by me. President
DCDRF, Burdwan
(Silpi Majumder)
Member
DCDRF, Burdwan
(Silpi Majumder)
Member
DCDRF, Burdwan
