BEFORE THE KARNATAKA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BANGALORE. (ADDL. BENCH)
DATED THIS THE 22nd DAY OF MARCH 2022
PRESENT
SRI RAVI SHANKAR – JUDICIAL MEMBER
SMT. SUNITA C.BAGEWADI - MEMBER
APPEAL NO. 11/2012
Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co., Ltd.,
Branch Office, # 363, Sri. Hari Complex,
Seetha Vilas Road, Mysore, Now represented by
Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co., Ltd.,
# 31, Ground Floor, TBR Tower,
1 Cross, New Mission Road,
Adjacent to Jain College and
Bangalore Stock Exchange, Bangalore-560 027.
(By Sri. A.N.Krishna Swamy, Adv.,)
……….Appellants.
-Versus-
S.C.Chikkanna S/o Late Pillaiah
Now aged about 50 years,
Somanahalli Village,
Maddur Taluk, Mandya District.
(By Sri. Prakash M.H., Adv.,)
……….Respondents
: O R D E R :
BY SRI. RAVISHANKAR – JUDICIAL MEMBER
This appeal is filed by the appellant/Opposite Party being aggrieved by the order dated:12.10.2011 passed by Mandya District Consumer Commission in C.C.No.56/2011.
2. We have heard the arguments from the appellant. None represented on behalf of the respondent. Hence, argument of respondent is taken as NIL.
3. We noticed here that the complainant has filed a complaint before the District Commission to claim own damage towards the accident of his Toyota Innova Car which was occurred on 16.02.2011. The appellant/Insurance company has repudiated the claim stating that at the time of accident, there was no valid insurance to the car. The premium paid towards the renewal of the policy by way of cheque was not honoured, as there was no sufficient fund in the account of the complainant. The same was intimated by the insurance company to the complainant. In spite of that, the District Commission not considered the validity of the policy and allowed the complaint by directing this appellant to pay an amount of Rs.49,639/- towards own damage claim along with cost of Rs.2,000/-.
4. The learned counsel for appellant vehemently argued that when the policy was not renewed, the claim cannot be settled. The cheque issued by the complainant was not honoured as there was no sufficient fund in the account.
5. Of-curse, we agree until and unless the amount was realized towards the premium, it cannot be considered as the policy is renewed. The complainant knowing-fully well that there was no sufficient balance in the account, had issued cheque for renewal of the policy. Even after receipt of the intimation about the dishonor of the cheque by the Opposite Party, the complainant had not made any efforts to renew the policy by paying the premium amount. Hence, we found, the order passed by the District commission lacks legality. The District Commission has made an error in not considering the non-renewal of the policy well within time and in spite of that has directed the Opposite Party to pay the own damage claim. Hence, the order passed by the District Commission is liable to be set-aside. Accordingly, we proceed to pass the following:-
: O R D E R :
The appeal is allowed. No costs.
The impugned order dated:12/10/2011 passed by the Mandya District Consumer Commission in C.C.No.56/2011 is set-aside. Consequently, the complaint filed by the complainant is hereby dismissed.
The amount in deposit shall be transmitted to the concerned District Commission to pay the same to the appellant/Opposite Party.
Send a copy of this order to both parties as well as concerned District Commission.
Lady Member. Judicial Member.
Tss
