| ORDER | ORDER MRS. NEENA SANDHU, PRESIDENT Smt. Jaswinder Kaur has filed this complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) against the Opposite Parties (hereinafter referred to as ‘the O.Ps.’) praying for issuance of the following directions to them:- i) To refund Rs.7,39,220.97/- along with benefits, ii) To pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation for the harassment, mental agony and pains caused to her, iii) To pay Rs.15,000/- as litigation expenses. 2. In brief, the case of the complainant is that she had purchased Mahindra Bolero bearing chassis No. D5C54937, engine No.GPD4C75070 in the year 2013 from Raj Motors, Rupnagar, which was got registered vide No. PB12T-5031. The said vehicle stands hypothecated with the Allahabad bank, as such, the said bank has been arrayed as a party due to legal technicalities. She got the said vehicle insured with the O.P. No. 1 on 22.6.2013 vide policy No. 36150031130100005624, which expired on 20.6.2014. On 29.3.2014, when the said vehicle was being driven by Sh. Bharvinder Singh son of Ratan Singh, resident of village Hussainpur, Tehsil & District Ropar, who was having a valid driving license to drive the same, and her son, namely, Sh. Vikram Singh, was also alongwith him, it met with an accident at village Doomcheri, as a stray cow came in front of the said vehicle and just to save her, the driver applied immediate break, due to which the said vehicle went out of control and hit with one tree, wall of bridge and a truck parked there. Due to the said impact, the vehicle got totally damaged and her son also suffered injuries, who had to take treatment from the hospital. However, the driver of the said vehicle got minor injuries. DDR No. 23 dated 1.4.2014 was also lodged by ASI Dilbag Singh regarding the said accident, on the statement of said Vikram Singh. Information about the accident was also given to the insurance company. The said vehicle is lying parked in Raj Motors, who issued a service quotation dated 4.7.2014 assessing the loss at Rs.7,39,220.97. As per provisions of the insurance policy, the O.P. No. 1 is liable to pay the entire repair amount. She had supplied all the documents i.e. copy of RC of the vehicle, insurance policy, driving license of the driver, claim form, service quotation and entire information regarding the accident of the said vehicle to the O.P. No.1 & requested for settlement of the claim, so that she can make payment to the repairer, but to no use and the matter was prolonged by it on one pretext or the other. However, on 26.2.2015, she received a letter from the O.P. No.1 in which it was mentioned that the driver of the vehicle was not holding a valid driving license. The said letter is totally based on wrong facts. The name of driver of the vehicle has been mentioned therein as Vikram Singh, whereas the same was being driven by Bharwinder Singh, who was having a valid driving license. The O.P. No. 1 has, thus, committed deficiency in service and adopted unfair trade practice, due to which she has suffered mental agony, physical harassment & financial loss. Hence, this complaint. 3. On being put to notice, the O.P. No. 1 filed written version taking preliminary objections; that the policy in question was issued by the answering O.P., strictly subject to its terms & conditions; that the complainant has misrepresented the facts; that there is no deficiency on the part of the answering O.P. and that the policy was obtained from the Divisional Office No. II, Leela Bhawan, Patiala, as such, this Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the present complaint. On merits, it is admitted that insurance policy bearing No.36150031130100005624 covering the period from 22.06.2013 to 21.6.2014, in respect of a new vehicle bearing Chassis No.D5C54937/GPD4C75070, was issued by the answering O.P. It is stated that during the currency of the said policy, the complainant had intimated one own damage claim with regard to the accidental loss caused to the said vehicle, at about 5.00 A.M. on 29.3.2014, near Village Doomcheri. Upon receipt of the intimation, the competent authority deputed Sh. R.P. Bhasin & Company, for conducting survey of the said vehicle, who submitted his preliminary report dated 13.8.2014 to the effect that there seems to be change of driver’s name. Accordingly, the answering O.P. deputed Sh. K.S. Chandok, Investigator, to investigate the claim, who submitted his report dated 13.12.2014 along with annexures, vide which it was informed that the vehicle in question was driven by Bikramjit Singh, who himself was injured in the accident and that Bharwinder Singh was wrongly introduced as driver, as the actual driver Bikramjit Singh was not holding valid & effective driving license. It is stated that the complainant had misrepresented the facts and had changed the actual version of the accident, as she had disclosed the name of the driver as Bhawinder Singh, whereas actually the same was Vikram Singh son of Himmat Singh, Caste Jatt, Village Gobindgarh Kulchian, PS Chamkaur Sahib. She had even tried to change the entry made by the police in the DDR and had lodged the name of the driver as Bharwinder Singh. It is further stated that interesting fact in this case is that the front portion of the car was forcefully damaged. It was not possible for driver to come unhurt after the said accident. The final survey report was submitted by R.P. Bhasin, surveyor, on 6.2.2015. The claim of the complainant was beyond the purview of the policy, on account of driving of the vehicle, by the unlicensed person. The competent authority had completely considered all the facts and has repudiated the claim of the complainant vide letter dated 26.2.2015, as Sh. Vikram Singh, who was driving the vehicle at the time of accident, was not holding a valid and effective driving license to driver the vehicle in question. Rest of the allegations made in the complaint have also been denied and a prayer has been made for dismissal of the same. 4. The O.P. No. 2 filed a separate written version taking preliminary objections; that the present complaint is not maintainable in the present form; that there is no deficiency in service on the part of the answering O.P., because it had only sanctioned the loan in favour of the complainant, for purchase of the vehicle in question, as such, she has no cause of action to file the complaint against it. On merits, it is admitted that the vehicle in question was hypothecated by the answering O.P. and that the answering O.P. has been arrayed as the O.P. in the complaint, due to legal technicalities. Rest of the facts mentioned in the complaint have been stated to be matter of record and it has been prayed that the complaint be decided, accordingly. 5. On being called upon to do so, the learned counsel for the complainant tendered affidavit of the complainant Ex. CW1/A, photocopies of documents Ex. C1 to C9 and closed the evidence. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the O.P. No.1 tendered affidavit of Sh. Surinderpal Sharma, Divisional Manager, Ex. OP1/A, affidavit of Sh. R.P. Bhasin, surveyor, Ex. OP1/B, affidavit of Er. K.S. Chandok, investigator, Ex. OP1/M, photocopies of documents Ex. OP1/C to Ex. OP1/L and closed the evidence, whereas no evidence was led by the O.P. No. 2. 6. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record of the file, carefully. 7. At the outset, the learned counsel for the O.P. No. 1 raised the objection that the present complaint is liable to be dismissed solely on the ground of territorial jurisdiction of this Forum, because the insurance policy in question, Ex.OP-1/D, was got issued by the complainant from the Patiala office of the insurance company. To this effect, the learned counsel for the complainant submitted that the complainant had purchased the vehicle in question from Raj Motors situated at Rupnagar, as is evident from the copy of receipt issued by it & copy of Form-Receipt of Fees issued by Punjab Motor Vehicle Department, Rupnagar and the said vehicle was got insured at the time of its purchase at Rupnagar itself through Raj Motors. Even on the policy document, Ex. C2, stamp of Raj Motors has been affixed. The insurance cover note Ex. C9 was also issued at Ropar. Thus, it is proved that the insurance policy in question was issued by the O.P. No.1 at Rupnagar, therefore, this Forum has territorial jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the instant complaint. From the insurance cover note, Ex. C9, it is apparent that the insurance policy in question was issued at Ropar, therefore, the complaint filed before this Forum is maintainable and the objection raised by the learned counsel for the O.P. No.1 is not sustainable, hence, rejected. 8. Now coming to the merits of the case, admittedly, the complainant lodged claim in respect of her Mahindra Bolero car bearing registration No. PB12T-5031, which was duly insured with with the O.P. No.1 for the period from 22.6.2013 to 21.6.2014 and got damaged in an accident occurred on 29.3.2014. However, on the basis of the investigation report and final survey report, the Claim Hub Office of the New India Assurance Co. Ltd., vide its letter dated 26.2.2015(Ex. C7), has repudiated the claim on the ground that the actual driver Mr. Bikramjit Singh did not hold a valid driving license. Now the questions that arises for determination before us are—(i) as to whether actually, Sh. Bikramjit Singh, was driving the said vehicle at the time of accident, (ii) As to whether said Bikramjit Singh, was holding a valid & effective driving license to drive the said vehicle? As per version of the complainant, at the time of accident of the vehicle in question, Sh. Bharwinder Singh, was driving the same, who was having a valid & effective driving license, and the said fact even finds mentioned in the DDR dated 1.4.2014 (Ex.C4), whereas the stand of the O.P. No.1 is that after detailed investigation of the case, it was found that Sh. Bikramjit Singh, was driving the vehicle in question at the time of its accident, who was not holding a valid & effective driving license. In support its version, it has placed on record the investigation report of Er. K. S. Chandhok, Ex. OP-1/L & his supporting affidavit Ex. OP-1/M. Er. K.S. Chandhok, investigator, in his report Ex.OP-1/L has stated that he had collected copy of Police Petrol Morinda Diary, Annex.- 21 through RTI. In the said report, it is mentioned that on 29.3.2014 at about 5.22 AM, a wireless message (mobile phone) was received from PS Morinda that accident had taken place at Morinda-Sirhind Road, near canal, at 5.15 A.M., accordingly, police petrol party comprising of H.C Vijay Singh, H. C. Pargat Singh, DVR HC Jasvir Singh, Constable Jasvir Singh, had reached at the spot and saw that Bolero No. PB-12NT-5383 had hit standing Truck No. PB-11AL-9795 from behind; that the Bolero driver Bikramjit Singh son of Himant Singh r/o village Gobindgarh Kuchia, Tehsil Chamkaur Sahib sustained injuries and that he was taken through Petrol Highway vehicle and was got admitted in Civil Hospital, Morinda at 5.30 A.M. The O.P. No. 1 has further produced a copy of Emergency Register of Civil Hospital, Morinda, which is Annexed with the report of the investigator as Annex. 17, to prove that it was Bikramjit Singh, who was driving the vehicle at the time of accident and received grievous injuries and as such, he was admitted in the Civil Hospital, Morinda. Nodoubt, from the perusal of DDR dated 1.4.2014 (Ex.C4), it is evident that as per statement made by Bikramjit Singh, before the police official concerned, Sh. Bharvinder Singh was driving the vehicle in question at the time of occurrence of the accident, but it may be stated that the said statement was recorded by the police official concerned on 1.4.2014 i.e. after 2-3 days of occurrence of accident, whereas the report , Annex.- 21, annexed with his report, Ex.OP-1/L, by Er. K.S. Chandhok, investigator, was recorded by Police Petrol, Morinda, on 29.02.2014 i.e. on the day of accident itself, after receipt of wireless message from the PS Morinda, in which the driver’s name has been mentioned as Bikramjit Singh son of Himant Singh r/o village Gobindgarh Kuchia, Tehsil Chamkaur Sahib. Since the report of the Police Petrol, Morinda, was recorded on the day of accident itself, i.e. on 29.03.2014, after seeing all the situation at the spot, whereas the DDR (Ex.C4) was recorded, on the basis of statement of Sh. Bikramjit Singh, on 1.4.2014, i.e. at a later stage of occurrence of accident, therefore, the report made by Police Petrol, Morinda, cannot be ignored and it cannot be concluded that it was Sh. Bharvinder Singh, who was driving the vehicle in question at the time of occurrence of the accident, and not Sh. Bikramjit Singh. In the aforesaid investigation report, Ex.OP-1/L, Er. K.S. Chandhok, investigator mentioned that Sh. Bikramjit Singh had himself admitted that he was not having a driving licnese and in support of the said version, he has annexed statement of said Birkam Jit Singh as Annex.-07 with his report. There is neither any rebuttal to the said statement from the side of the complainant nor any driving license of said Sh. Bikramjit Singh has been placed on record by her. Accordingly, we hold that Sh. Bikramjit Singh was not having any license to drive the vehicle in question. 9. Facing with this situation, we are of the view that the repudiation of the claim made by the O.P. No.1 cannot be said to be illegal, in any manner and complaint filed against is liable to be dismissed. So far as the complaint filed against the O.P. No.2 is concerned, neither any deficiency in service on its part has been alleged nor the same has been proved and moreover, the claim, if any, found to be payable was to be paid by the O.P. No. 1 only. Accordingly, the complaint filed against the O.P. No.2 is also liable to be dismissed. 10. In view of the aforesaid discussion, the complaint is dismissed against both the O.Ps., the same being devoid of merit. The parties are left to bear their own cost. The certified copies of this order be supplied to the parties forthwith, free of costs, as permissible under the rules and the file be indexed and consigned to the Record Room. ANNOUNCED (NEENA SANDHU) Dated: 21.03.2016 PRESIDENT (SHAVINDER KAUR) MEMBER | |
