Haryana

Karnal

791/2009

Ravinder Kumar S/o Sh. Satya Pal Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Reliance General Insurance - Opp.Party(s)

Sh.Sudhakar Mittal

29 Oct 2015

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM KARNAL.  

                                                          Complaint No. 791 of 2009

                                                          Date of instt.: 21.12.2009

                                                          Date of decision: 3.12.2015

 

Ravinder Kumar son of Sh.Satyapal Singh resident of house no.503, Gali No.7, Karan Vihar, Karnal.

                                                                  ……..Complainant.

                   Vs.

 

 

Reliance General Insurance Company Limited through its Manager/Authorized Signatory, having one of its offices at 213-214, Sector 34,  Chandigarh.

 

                                                                  …..Opposite  Party.

                     Complaint u/s 12 of the Consumer

                     Protection Act.

 

Before          Sh.K.C.Sharma……….President.

                   Smt. Shashi Sharma……….Member.

                   Sh.Anil Sharma…….Member.

 

Present:-       Sh.Sudhakar Mittal  Advocate for the complainant.,

                    Sh.Mohit Goyal Advocate for the Opposite Party..

 

                  

ORDER:

 

                        The  complainant has filed the present complaint u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986,  on the averments that he got insured his tractor bearing registration No. HR-05V-8971  with the Opposite Party, vide insurance  policy No. 2005382343100390 for the period of  29.03.2008 to 28.3.2009 for insured Declared Value of Rs.2,16,600/-. Premium amount of Rs.4581/- was paid  for the said insurance policy.  On 10.6.2008 at about 7.30 PM the tractor met with an accident with truck near Ranwar Road, Meerut Road, Karnal. At the time of accident, the tractor was driven by Sh.Gulshan Sachdeva son of Sh.Nand Lal resident of Karnal, who was having valid and effective driving licence. Intimation of the accident was  duly given to the Opposite Party on 11.6.2008 and the tractor was shifted to New Green Tractors, Arjun Gate, Karnal. Surveyor of the Opposite Party  visited the  workshop  and took the photographs of the damaged tractor and  obtained the necessary documents  and original  bills from him. Surveyor also obtained his signatures on blank papers to settle the claim. The Opposite Party  further deputed second and third surveyors for the reasons best  known to it. The matter was lingered on one pretext or the other. He sent letter dated 12.3.2009 to the Opposite Party  for settling  his claim but, to no effect .He had spent an amount of Rs.1,12,000/- on the repairs of the tractor. Non payment of his claim by the Opposite Party  amounted to deficiency in service,s which caused mental harassment apart from financial loss.

 

2.                 Notice of the complaint was given to the Opposite Party,  who put into appearance and filed written statement controverting the claim of the complainant. Objections have been raised that complainant has not approached this Forum with clean hands; that  this Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain and decide the present complaint as complicated questions of law land facts are involved;  that the complaint is false and vexacious and is an abuse of the process of law; and that the   complaint is not maintainable.

 

                    On merits, it has been submitted that Opposite Party received information about the accident of the tractor of the complainant, which took place on 10.6.2008.M/s Royal Associate was deputed to assess the loss and investigate the matter. During investigation he recorded statement of the complainant and Bhim Sain and they admitted that tractor was used for supply of Rori, Bajri, Sand and cement and at the time of accident i.e. on 10.6.2008, the tractor was carrying cement. Thus, the tractor was being used for commercial purposes  at the time of accident, whereas  the same was registered for agricultural purposes only. Therefore, the complainant violated the terms and conditions of the insurance policy and his claim was rightly repudiated. The other allegations made in the complaint have been specifically denied.

 

3.                 In evidence of the complainant, his affidavit Ex.CW1/A and  documents Ex.C2 to Ex.C5 have been tendered.

 

4.                 On the other hand,  in evidence of the Opposite Party, affidavit of Sh.Abhishek Chander Assistant Manager Ex.O1,  affidavit of Deepanker Soni Ex.O2 and documents Ex.O3 to Ex.O6 have been tendered.

 

5.                 We have appraised the evidence on record, the material circumstances of the case and  the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties.

6.                 The Opposite Party has not disputed the factum of accident and the damage to the tractor of the complainant in the said accident. The claim of the complainant was repudiated on the sole ground that at the time of accident, the tractor was being used for commercial purposes i.e. for  carrying cement.

 

7.                 The learned counsel for the  Opposite Party  vehemently argued that the Investigator Deepankur Soni, recorded the statements of the complainant and Bhim Sain during the course of investigation and it was found that tractor was used for commercial purposes in routine and at the time of accident, the same was carrying cement for supplying the same to village Ranwar,  whereas the tractor was registered for agricultural purposes only. In this way, the complainant violated the condition of the insurance policy and as such his claim was repudiated.

8.                 The argument  advanced by the learned counsel for the Opposite Party  cannot be accepted being devoid of force. No copy of statement of the complainant or  Bhim Sasin allegedly recorded by the investigator has been produce on record to substantiate plea that they  admitted that on the date of accident the tractor was carrying cement or any other building material for supply and was used for commercial purposes.  In the report, it has been mentioned that tractor was carrying cement from Sachdeva Marble to village Ranwar,  but no document regarding loading of cement in the said tractor from Sachdeva Marble was obtained by the investigator. Even the statement of the owner or authorized agent of Sachdeva Marble or  the person to whom cement was  to be supplied was recorded in order to establish that tractor was carrying cement on hire basis. Therefore, the bald report of investigator cannot be accepted that tractor was being used for commercial  purposes at the time of accident. In this regard sustenance  may also be sought from the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case titled  Fahim Ahmed and othes Vs. United India Insurance Co.Ltd.and others  Vol.CLXXIV(2014-2) PLR 722 wherein a trolly was attached with the tractor, which was carrying  sand for construction of  underground  tank near the farm land for irrigation purposes.  It was held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court that merely because  it was carrying sand would not mean that tractor was being used for commercial purposes, therefore, there was breach of condition of policy on the part of the insured.

 

9.       As per case of the complainant he had spent about Rs.1,12,000/- on the repair of tractor, but surveyor assessed the loss after making compulsory deductions as Rs.85291/- .Credence is attached to the report of surveyor unless there are adequate reasons to discard the same. Complainant has not produced  any  no evidence worth the name except his affidavit that report of surveyor is wrong and he has spent Rs.1,12,000/- on the repairs of the tractor. Under such circumstances, there is no reason to disbelieve the report of surveyor regarding assessment of the loss as Rs.85291/-.  As the repudiation of the claim of the complainant by the Opposite Party was not justified in any manner, therefore, there was deficiency in services on the part of the Opposite Party.

 

10.               As a sequel to the foregoing discussion, we accept the present complaint and direct the Opposite Party to make the payment of Rs.85291/- to the complainant alongwith interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of the present complaint i.e.  2.12.2009 till its actual realization. The complainant shall also be entitled for a sum of Rs.5500/- for the mental agony and harassment caused to him and for the litigation expenses. The Opposite Party  shall make the compliance of this order within a period of thirty days form the date of receipt of the copy of this order.  The parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

 

Announced
dated: 03.12.2015.                                                                      

                                                                    (K.C.Sharma)

                                                                   President,

                                                         District Consumer Disputes

                                                          Redressal Forum, Karnal.

(Anil Sharma )       (Smt.Shashi Sharma)    

   Member.                             Member

 

                  

 

 

 

 

 

 

Present:-       Sh.Sudhakar Mittal  Advocate for the complainant.,

                    Sh.Mohit Goyal Advocate for the Opposite Party.

 

                   Arguments heard. Vide our separate order of the even date, the present complaint

 

 has been accepted. The parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

 

Announced
dated: 03.12.2015.                                                                      

                                                                    (K.C.Sharma)

                                                                   President,

                                                         District Consumer Disputes

                                                          Redressal Forum, Karnal.

(Anil Sharma )       (Smt.Shashi Sharma)    

   Member.                             Member