Date of filing : 07-04-2011
Date of order : 23-03-2012
IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KASARAGOD
CC.82/2011
Dated this, the 23rd day of March 2012
PRESENT
SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ : PRESIDENT
SMT.P.RAMADEVI : MEMBER
SMT. K.G.BEENA : MEMBER
Sainul Abedin.K.M, } Complainant
S/o.Muhammed Kunhi,
Poomkavanam Manzil, Manikoth.Po.
Ajanur Village,
(Adv. P.Latheesh, Hosdurg)
Roshan, } Opposite party
Motor Claim Department,
Bajaj Alliance General Insurance Co.Ltd,
No.403 & 404 Crystal Are
4th Floor Balmatta Road, Mangalore.575001.
(Adv.S.Mammu, Taliparamba)
O R D E R
SMT.P.RAMADEVI, MEMBER
The facts of the case in brief is that the complainant’s new vehicle bearing Reg.No.KL-60C-1742 Eicher Cab & Tipper (1080C) involved in an accident. The complainant purchased the vehicle on 21-12-2010 and was registered on 27-12-2010. The accident was on 6-1-2011. According to the complainant while he was taking the vehicle to RTO for inspection the accident occurred. Immediately after the accident the complainant informed the authorized insurance surveyor of the opposite party and surveyor inspected the vehicle. As per the instruction of the surveyor the said vehicle was brought to Sreedevi AutoWorks Ambalathara and the complainant has to pay `21,983/- for repair. The complainant submitted the above said claim before opposite party. On 12-03-2011 the complainant received a letter from opposite party stating that the fitness certificate and permit was not available at the time of accident hence claim is repudiated. According to complainant there is no adequate reason for the repudiation hence this complaint.
2. On receipt of notice from this Forum the opposite party appeared through counsel and filed their version. The opposite party admits that at the time of accident the vehicle has got valid insurance. According to opposite party they never repudiated the claim but they asked documents, permit and fitness certificate as per the conditions of policy to settle the claim and the complainant has failed to furnish the same hence the opposite party is not liable to compensate the complainant. The surveyor assessed the damage is `14,735/-.
3. On the side of the complainant Exts A1 to A5 marked. No oral evidence is adduced by opposite party and no documents marked.
4. After considering the facts of the case the only question to be settled in this case is whether the plying of a vehicle without fitness certificate and permit would absolve the insurer from settling own damage.
5. Here admittedly the vehicle was not having permit and fitness certificate at the time of accident. The vehicle is a new one. Since the vehicle is a new one there is no question of fitness arose. We can presume that it is fit. With regard to the permit according to the complainant the accident was occurred at the time when he was on the way to RTO to get the vehicle to be inspected for the purpose of documents. This statement of complaint is believeable.
6. According to opposite party the vehicle was not having permit and fitness certificate at the time of accident it amounts to violation of policy conditions and the stipulations of the Motor Vehicle Act.
7. But we are unable to accept this contention in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Amalendra V. Oriental Insruance Co. reported in II (2010) CPJ (SC).
8. In that case the Hon’ble Supreme Court relying on the cases National Insurance Co.Ltd.V Nitin Khanddeal reported in 2008 (7)SC ALE.351 and in United India Insurance Co.Ltd V Gian sigh reported in 2006 CTJ 221 CPJ (NCDRC) has held that in case of violation of the condition of the policy as to the nature of use of the vehicle, the claim ought to be settled on non-standard basis.
9. Again the Hon’ble National Commission in the case of New India Assurance Co. Ltd V. Narayan Prasad Appaprasad Pathak reported in (2006) CPJ 144 (NC) while answering to the question whether the insurance company can repudiate the claim in a case where the vehicle carrying passengers and the driver did not have a proper driving licence which met with an accident has been complained the general guidelines set out by the General Insurance Company about the settling of all such non-standard claim and that such claim ought to have settled as per guide lines.
10. One of the guideline mentioned in that case is that the insured is entitled for 75% of the warranty/admissible claim in case of breach of policy conditions including limitations as to its use.
11. Apart from all the above, whether the complainant is entitled to reimbursement of loss/damage caused to the vehicle from the insurance company as the complainant plied the vehicle without fitness certificate directly answered by the Hon’ble National Commission in the case of G.Kothainachair V The Branch Manager, United India Insurance Co.Ltd in Revision Petition No.1503/2004 dt.29-10-2007. In this case the National Commission referring to several judgments of the Hon’ble Apex Court has held that the repudiation of claim amounts to deficiency in service and the insurer is therefore liable to compensate the complainant.
12. Here applying to the above guidelines and also in view of the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and National Commissions we are of the view that the complainant is entitled for 75% of the amount assessed by the surveyor.
13. Here the surveyor has assessed the damage is `14,735/-. The complainant is entitled to get 75% of the above amount on non-standard basis 75% of `14,735/- is rounded to `11,050/-(`` eleven thousand and fifty only). The complainant is entitled to get that amount.
In the result the complaint is allowed and opposite party is directed to pay `11,050/- to the complainant with interest @9% per annum from the date of complaint till payment together with a cost of `3000/-. Time for compliance of the order is 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of the order.
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Exts.
A1. Photocopy of RC. KL-60-C-1742
A2. Photocopy of Certificate Cum Policy Schedule.
A3. 21-1-2011 photocopy of Bill for an amount of 6500/-
A4. 21-01-20111 Retail Invoice.
A5. Letter issued by OP to complainant.
PW1. Sainul Abedin.K.M.
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Pj/
