Kerala

Ernakulam

CC/21/57

BINI P PHILIPH - Complainant(s)

Versus

ROYAL SUNDARAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. - Opp.Party(s)

M PAUL VARGHESE

16 Feb 2023

ORDER

BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
ERNAKULAM
 
Complaint Case No. CC/21/57
( Date of Filing : 01 Feb 2021 )
 
1. BINI P PHILIPH
MAMMALAYIL H EZHAKKARA P.O PUTHENCRUZ VIA MANEED VILLAGE ERNAKULAM
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. ROYAL SUNDARAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.
VISHRANTHI MELARAM TOWERS NO. 2/319 RAJIV GANDHI SALAI OMR, KARAPAKKAM CHENNAI
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. D.B BINU PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MR. RAMACHANDRAN .V MEMBER
 HON'BLE MRS. SREEVIDHIA T.N MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
 
Dated : 16 Feb 2023
Final Order / Judgement

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION ERNAKULAM

       Dated this the 16th day of February, 2023                                                                                                

                             Filed on: 01/02/2021

PRESENT

Shri.D.B.Binu                                                                          President

Shri.V.Ramachandran                                                              Member

Smt.Sreevidhia.T.N                                                                 Member                                                                  

CC NO.57/2021

Between

COMPLAINANT

Bini P. Philip, W/o. Eldho M. Kuriakose, Mammalayil House, Ezhakkaranad P.O., Puthencruze (Via.), Maneed Village, Ernakulam, PIN 682308

(Rep. by Adv. M. Paul Varghese, Lawyers Associates, Kalyan Chambers, Chittoor Road, Ernakulam South, Kochi 682016)

VS

OPPOSITE PARTIES

1.     Royal Sundaram General Insurance Co. Ltd., Vishranthi Melaram Towers, No. 2/319, Rajiv Gandhi Salai (OMR), Karapakkam, Chennai 600002. Rep. by its Managing Director.

2.     Royal Sundaram General Insurance Co. Ltd., Door No. 1541/386 F, Radhakrishna Building, Kadappakkada, CZ-Kollam, Kollam 691008. Rep. by its Authorised Officer.

(OP No. 1& 2 Rep. by Adv. Jacob Mathew P., Mathews Jacobs Associates)

 

FINAL ORDER

 

V. Ramachandran, Member:

 

The complaint was filed under section 12 (1) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The complainant is a registered owner of Mahindra Blazo 37 Pusher 10X2 6C CR3 Multi Axle Goods Vehicle with Registration No. KL 17-T1045. Opposite parties are the insurance company registered as Royal Sundaram General Insurance Co. Ltd. The complainant had insured the aforesaid vehicle with the opposite party. The complainant’s vehicle met with an accident at Ponnani on 03/10/2020 causing damage to an electric post and connections managed by the Kerala State Electricity Board, Ponnani. The accident was informed to the opposite parties but there was no response. The complainant paid a sum of Rs.18,018/- to K.S.E.B., Ponnani for rectification of damage caused to the electric post. The complainant states that they sent a notice by registered post to the opposite parties requesting to refund the amount of Rs.18,018/- to the complainant along with Utilization Certificate issued by the authorities of K.S.E.B. The complainant further states that the opposite parties are liable to pay the amount to the complainant under the heading ‘B-Liability’ which specifically mentioned that the ‘basic premium including premium for TPPD’ is Rs.43,037/-. Since the opposite parties had not paid the amount, the  complainant approached this Commission seeking relief of getting the amount of Rs.18,018/- paid by the complainant along with other reliefs.

Upon notice from this Commission opposite parties No. 1 & 2 appeared and filed their joint version.

In the version the opposite parties alleged that they are not liable to pay the amount mainly due to the following reasons. It is proved that the vehicle KL-17-T-1045 Heavy Goods Vehicle met with road accident on 03/10/2020 was insured with the opposite parties for the period from 08/01/2020 to 07/01/2021. The complainant has not informed the alleged accident along with necessary documents including licence and badge of driver for verification to the opposite parties in time. Secondly the amount was paid by the complainant directly to K.S.E.B. and the amount of Rs.18,018/- has been worked out and paid by the complainant himself without the knowledge of the opposite parties. Non-furnishing of timely intimation to the opposite parties is very clear violation of the Policy Conditions and the opposite parties was intimated about the accident happened on 03/10/2020 only on 09/11/2020. Further and above all this, the case is to be dealt with before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal by K.S.E.B. as the damage was caused in an accident arising out of the vehicle to electric post. These are the main contentions taken by the opposite parties.

The complainant filed proof affidavit along with 12 documents which are marked as Exbt. A1 to A12. Exbt. A1 is the copy of Certificate of Insurance, Exbt. A2 is Copy of RC Book, Exbt. A3 is copy of Authorization Certificate, Exbt. A4 is copy of National Permit for Goods Carriage, Exbt. A5 is copy of Certificate of Fitness, Exbt. A6 is receipt issued by K.S.E.B., Exbt. A7 is copy of letter received from K.S.E.B., Exbt. A8 is the copy of letter issued to the opposite parties, Exbt. A9 is copy of postal receipt, Exbt. A10 is copy of postal receipt, Exbt. A11 is track consignment and Exbt. A12 is track consignment.

There is no oral or other evidence from either side. On verification of all documents produced by the complainant and also on going through the allegation and contention taken by either side the following points are verified.

i.                   Whether the complainant has proved that there was any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties as alleged in the complaint?

ii.                 If so whether the complainant is entitled to get any compensation from the opposite parties and the quantum of compensation entitled for the complainant?

iii.              Reliefs and costs?

 

Since the complainant paid the amount directly to K.S.E.B. without waiting for intimation and obtaining direction from the opposite parties which is a very clear instance of violation of existing condition and terms entered into between the complainant and opposite party. Moreover necessary documents were not produced by the complainant before the opposite parties in time which could also have not been proved with any documents by the complainant. The complainant could not have established deficiency in service from the side of opposite parties. Better option to approach MACT before the complainant as alleged by the opposite parties also have not been utilised by the complainant. Hence there is no merit in the complaint is only fit for dismissal and therefore dismissed.

 

Pronounced in the open Commission on this the 16th day of February, 2023,

 

 

Sd/-

                                                                             V. Ramachandran, Member

 

Sd/-

                                                                             D.B.Binu, President

                                                                                         

 

                                                                                         Sd/-

Sreevidhia.T.N, Member         

Forwarded/by Order

 

 

Assistant Registrar

 

 

 

APPENDIX

 

COMPLAINANT’S EVIDENCE

Exbt. A1:    Copy of Certificate of Insurance

Exbt. A2:    Copy of RC Book

Exbt. A3:    Copy of Authorization Certificate

Exbt. A4:    Copy of National Permit for Goods Carriage

Exbt. A5:    Copy of Certificate of Fitness

Exbt. A6:    Receipt issued by K.S.E.B.

Exbt. A7:    Copy of letter received from K.S.E.B.

Exbt. A8:    Copy of letter issued to the opposite parties

Exbt. A9:    Copy of postal receipt

Exbt. A10:  Copy of postal receipt

Exbt. A11:  Track consignment

Exbt. A12:  Track consignment.

 

OPPOSITE PARTY’S EVIDENCE

Nil

 

 

 

Despatch date:

By hand:     By post                                                  

kp/

 

 

 

CC No. 57/2021

Order Date: 16/02/2023

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. D.B BINU]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[HON'BLE MR. RAMACHANDRAN .V]
MEMBER
 
 
[HON'BLE MRS. SREEVIDHIA T.N]
MEMBER
 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.