IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KOTTAYAM
Dated, the 26th day of October, 2022.
Present: Sri. Manulal V.S. President
Smt. Bindhu R. Member
Sri. K.M. Anto, Member
C C No. 135/2019 (Filed on 09-08-2019)
Petitioner : Ajith V. Somanathan,
Vellappallil,
Thottackad P.O.
Kottayam - 686539
Vs.
Opposite party : (1) Rejith,
Revas Driving School
and Autho Consultancy
NSS Junction,
Karukachal, Kottayam
(Adv. Jayakrishnan R.)
(2) Shriram General Insurance
Co. Ltd. Payyil Kohinoor Arcade,
Room No.6, 4th Floor, Sankranthi
Junction, Kottayam, Ettumanoor
Pin – 686028
(Adv. Agi Joseph)
O R D E R
Sri. K.M. Anto, Member
The case is filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986.
The brief of the complainant’s case is as follows.
The complainant is the owner of vehicle KL-40-C-4810 Mahindra Pick up Van. The complainant used to do all the paper works relating to RTO office through the first opposite party. On 14/09/2018 complainant approached the first opposite party for taking the fitness certificate for his vehicle. The first opposite party Rejith collected Rs.18990/- by cash from the complainant and issued Insurance certificate of Sreeram General Insurance company with Policy o.419012/31/19/000771. The insurance certificate is not genuine. On verification with the Sreeram Insurance Company it was revealed that insurance has not been taken for the vehicle KL.40. C.4510 from the Sreeram Insurance company. complaint was filed before Karukachal Police station against Rejith on 8/05/2019. An agent of the second opposite party Sreeram insurance company is also a party for this fraud. The act of the opposite parties amounts to unfair trade practice and
deficiency in service. Hence this complaint is filed for getting compensation for
the loss and sufferings.
On admission of the complaint copy of the complaint was duly served to the opposite parties. The opposite parties appeared and filed their version.
The version of the first opposite party is that he is doing all paper works relating to R T Office such as testing vehicles, tax renewal, fitness certificate etc. The complainant had approached several times in connection with such matters. The insurance can be renewed only by persons or institutions having license provided by IRDAI and the first opposite party had no such license. This opposite party never had obtained any amount from the complainant and issued any policy or fabricated policy.
The actual fact is that an agent of the second opposite party by name Ranjith used to canvass insurance from several persons from the locality. Karukachal police had registered case against this Ranjith in connection with fraud committed by him in issuing insurance certificate to several persons. The
second opposite party initially took the responsibility of the mischief committed by one of their staff and agreed to issue policy to all victims of the fraud committed by the said Ranjith but later they had withdrawn from the offer.
The version of the second opposite party is that the complainant himself
admitted in the complaint that the second opposite party had not issued any policy for the vehicle with No. KL-40-C-4510.The complainant or any other person has not applied for vehicle insurance policy and have not paid any premium to the second opposite party for the vehicle KL.40. C.4510.The complainant is not a consumer of the second opposite party. There is no deficiency of service on the part of the second opposite party.
The complainant filed Proof affidavit and marked documents Exhibits A1 and A2. The complainant was examined as PW1.The second opposite party filed
proof affidavit and marked documents Exhibit B1 and B2.
Ongoing through the complaint, version of the opposite parties and evidence
adduced we would like consider the following points
(1) Whether there is unfair trade practice or deficiency in service on the part of
the opposite parties
(2) If so, what are the reliefs and costs?
Points 1 &2
On the basis of the complaint and version of the opposite parties it is clear that the complainant who is the owner of Mahindra pickup van bearing registration No.KL.40. C.4510 had approached the first opposite party for taking the fitness certificate for the vehicle and took Ext A1 vehicle insurance certificate.
The Ext A1 is the insurance certificate with policy No.419012/31/19/000771 for the period from 13/09/2018 to 12/09/2019 for the vehicle with No.KL.40. C.4510. The total premium paid is Rs.14540/-and is issued by Shriram General Insurance Company Ltd.
Ext A2 is the copy of the petition submitted before SHO, Karukachal Police
station by the complainant against the first opposite party for issuing fake insurance certificate with policy no.419012/31/19/000771 on 13/9/18.
Ext B2 is the copy of FIR in No.0722/2019 registered at karukachal police station. The complainant in this case is Renjith Rajan S/O Raju and the accused is Renjith K.R Marketing Executive, Sreeram General Insurance Comp. The case of the complainant is that the insurance certificate issued by the first opposite party vide Ext A1 is a forged document. In Capital Charitable & Education Society Vs Axis Bank Limited decided on 9th December 2019, the Hon. NCDRC has held that “This Commission has taken a consistent view that a case related to fraud and forgery, cannot be decided by the consumer Forum as the proceedings in consumer forum are summary in Nature. This Commission has held in the following case that the mater relating to Fraud and Forgery cannot be decided under the proceedings of consumer protection Act 1986.”
“P.N. Khanna Vs Bank of India, II (2015) CPJ 54 (NC) On the basis of the above discussed findings the complaint is not maintainable as per the consumer protection Act 1986 and is liable to be dismissed. The complaint is dismissed.
Pronounced in the Open Commission on this the 26th day of October, 2022
Sri. K.M. Anto, Member Sd/-
Sri. Manulal V.S. President Sd/-
Smt. Bindhu R. Member Sd/-
Appendix
Sworn statement of complainant
A1 – Ajith V. Somanathan
Exhibits marked from the side of complainant
A1 - Certificate cum policy schedule
A2 – Receipt of petition No.62163/2019 dtd.08-05-19
Exhibits marked from the side of opposite party
B1 – Copy of caution notice
B2 – Copy of FIR0722 from Karuchal Police Station
By Order
Assistant Registrar
