Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

CC/339/2013

Arockia Sahaya Seelan, - Complainant(s)

Versus

Reliece Genral Insurance Co Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

A.Rajapandian

27 Nov 2018

ORDER

                                                                        Date of Filing  : 21.10.2013

                                                                          Date of Order : 27.11.2018

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (SOUTH)

@ 2^ND Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C. Nagar, Park Town, Chennai – 3.

 

PRESENT: THIRU. M. MONY, B.Sc., L.L.B, M.L.                    : PRESIDENT

                 TMT. K. AMALA, M.A., L.L.B.                                : MEMBER-I

 

C.C. No.339/2013

DATED THIS TUESDAY THE 27^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2018

                                 

Arockia Sahaya Seelan,

C-202, Platina Apartment,

Chandramauli Garden,

Kalakhadak,

Wakad, Pune,

Maharastra – 411 057.                                                  .. Complainant.                                                     

 

                                                                                           ..Versus..

 

M/s. Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd.,

Represented by its Manager,

No.29, 3^rd Floor,

North Usman Road,

T. Nagar,

Chennai – 600 017.                                                 ..  Opposite party.

          

Counsel for complainant            :  M/s. A. Rajapandian & others

Counsel for opposite party        :  Mrs. Elveera Ravindran & another

                                                                   

ORDER

THIRU. M. MONY, PRESIDENT

       This complaint has been filed by the complainant against the opposite party under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 praying to pay a sum of Rs.2,10,000/- towards the full insurance value of the complainant’s vehicle to pay a sum of Rs.7,50,000/- towards compensation for deficiency in service, negligent act, unfair trade practice and mental agony with cost of Rs.10,000/- to the complainant.

1.     The averments of the complaint in brief are as follows:

The complainant submits that he has availed motor car insurance policy vide No.1201722311000118 for his Ford-Ikon bearing Registration No. TN 48C 3620 from the opposite party for the period 19.04.2012 to 18.04.2013.   Further the complainant submits that he has paid a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards the insurance premium on 18.04.2012 to the Sales Manager of the opposite party namely Mr. Mohammed Rafique.   Further the complainant submits that on 09.08.2012, his car bearing No. TN 48C 3620 met with an accident caused severe damages to the car including engine which was estimated to the tune of Rs.1,38,000/-.  Immediately, the complainant approached the opposite party for claiming damages through insurance policy.  The complainant further submits that he approached the opposite party to initiate the proceedings to claim the damages through the insurance policy perhaps by the time the complainant got shock and surprise with the reply of the opposite party that the complainant’s insurance policy was in the status of ‘In Active’.  The Branch Manager also told that the Sales Manager, Mr. Mohammed Rafique collected several premium amounts of the opposite party and mishandled the policy amount of various customers.    

2.     Further the complainant states that due E-mails dated:15.11.2012 and 08.02.2013 was issued to the opposite party and IRDA for such ‘In Active’ nature of the insurance policy and claim of complainant was ended in vain.   Hence, the complainant issued police complaint on 01.11.2012 before the Commissioner of Police, Chennai regarding the receipt of the amount by the Sales Manager of the opposite party Mr. Mohamed Rafique.  Further the complainant submits that the matter was also brought to the knowledge of the Insurance Regulatory & Development Authority (IRDA) by lodging a complaint through website and also to the opposite party through an e-mail but all his efforts were gone vain.   The act of the opposite party caused great mental agony.  Hence the complaint is filed.

3.      The brief averments in the written version filed by the  opposite party is as follows:

The opposite party specifically denies each and every allegation made in the complaint and puts the complainant to strict proof of the same.   The opposite party states that the complainant failed to inform the opposite party immediately on the occurrence of the alleged incident thus depriving the opposite party of the opportunity to ascertain the exact cause and the genuineness of the claim.    The opposite party further states that due to the complainant’s negligence he dashed against the road side and took his car further resulting in the seizure of engine hence that was a consequential loss for which, the opposite party is not liable.   Further the opposite party states that as per the terms and conditions of the policy, it is clearly stated that in the event of any accident or break down, the vehicle shall not be left unattended without proper precautions being taken to prevent further damages or loss and if the vehicle be driven before the necessary repairs are effected any extension of the damage or any further damage of the vehicle shall be entirely at the insured’s own risk.   Therefore, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party.  Hence the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

4.   In order to prove the averments in the complaint, the complainant has filed proof affidavit as his evidence and documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A10 are marked.  Inspite of sufficient time is given, the opposite party has failed to file proof affidavit to prove the contentions raised in the written version.  Hence it is concluded as ‘No Proof Affidavit’.

5.      The points for consideration is:-

1. Whether the complainant is entitled to a sum of Rs.2,10,000/- for repairing the car as prayed for?

2. Whether the complainant is entitled to a sum of Rs.7,50,000/- towards compensation for deficiency in service and mental agony and cost of Rs.10,000/- as prayed for?

6.      On point:-

The opposite party has not filed any proof affidavit to prove the contentions raised in the written version.  The complainant has not filed any written arguments.  Perused the records namely the complaint, written version, proof affidavit of complainant and documents.  The complainant pleaded and contended that he has availed motor car insurance policy vide No.1201722311000118 for his Ford-Ikon bearing Registration No. TN 48C 3620 from the opposite party for the period 19.04.2012 to 18.04.2013 as per Ex.A2.   Further the contention of the complainant is that he has paid a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards the insurance premium on 18.04.2012 to the Sales Manager of the opposite party namely Mr. Mohammed Rafique.   But there is no record.   Further the contention of the complainant is that on 09.08.2012, his car bearing No. TN 48C 3620 met with an accident caused severe damages to the car including engine which was estimated to Rs.1,38,000/-. Immediately the complainant approached the opposite party for claiming damages through insurance policy.  Ex.A3 to Ex.A5 is the intimation and claim.   But to the surprise, the opposite party replied that the complainant’s insurance policy was in the status of ‘Inactive’.  The Branch Manager also told that the Sales Manager, Mr. Mohammed Rafique collected several premium amounts of the opposite party and mishandled which caused further mental agony proves the deficiency in service.    

7.     Further the complainant contended that due e-mail as per Ex.A6 & Ex.A7 was issued to the opposite party and IRDA for such inactive nature of the insurance policy and claim of the complainant ended in vain.   Hence, the complainant issued police complaint regarding the receipt of the amount by the Sales Manager of the opposite party Mr. Mohamed Rafique and filed this complaint claiming compensation.  Further the contention of the complainant is that the opposite party has not filed any proof affidavit to prove his contentions raised in the written version which are imaginary.  On a careful perusal of the written version also, it is not disputed that the issuance of Ex.A2, policy and payment of the premium amount by the complainant.  The contention regarding own negligence of causing damages to the car and claiming huge amount without any basis  also has not been proved by the opposite party by way of filing proof affidavit in this summary trial case.   But the complainant is claiming a sum of Rs.2,10,000/- the assured value of the insurance policy; is not acceptable.  The complainant can claim only the expenses incurred towards damage of his vehicle (i.e.) a sum of Rs.1,38,300/-.  Considering the facts and circumstances of the case this Forum is of the considered view that the opposite party shall pay a sum of Rs.1,38,300/- being expenses incurred towards damages to the complainant’s vehicle and to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards compensation for mental agony with cost of Rs.5,000/-.

In the result, this complaint is allowed in part.   The opposite party is  directed to pay a sum of Rs.1,38,300/- (Rupees One lakh thirty eight thousand three hundred only) being expenses incurred towards damages to the complainant’s vehicle and to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) towards compensation for mental agony with cost of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) to the complainant.

The aboveamounts shall be payablewithin six weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, failing which, the said amounts shall carry interest at the rate of 9% p.a. to till the date of payment.

Dictated  by the President to the Steno-typist, taken down, transcribed and computerized by her, corrected by the President and pronounced by us in the open Forum on this the 27^th day of November 2018. 

 

MEMBER –I                                                                      PRESIDENT

COMPLAINANT SIDE DOCUMENTS:

Ex.A1	18.04.2012	Copy of Insurance Policy Renewal Notice from the opposite party
Ex.A2	19.04.2012	Copy of Insurance Policy of the car
Ex.A3	09.08.2012	Copy of the letter given to the opposite party to complainant
Ex.A4	09.08.2012	Copy of Memo of estimation
Ex.A5	11.08.2012	Copy of claim reference
Ex.A6	15.11.2012	Copy of E-Mail sent to the opposite party from the complainant
Ex.A7	08.02.2013	Copy of complaint ledged with IRDA by the complainant
Ex.A8		Copy of Police complaint lodged by the opposite party against their Sales Manager, Mr. A. Mohamed Rafique
Ex.A9		Coy of visiting card of Mr. A. Mohamed Rafique
Ex.A10		Copy of RC book of the complainant’s vehicle

 

OPPOSITE  PARTY SIDE DOCUMENTS:  NO PROOF AFFIDAVIT

 

 

MEMBER –I                                                                      PRESIDENT