DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KANDHAMAL, PHULBANI
C.C NO. 09 OF 2013
Present: Sri Rabindranath Mishra - President.
Miss Sudhira Laxmi Pattanaik - Member.
Sri Chakadola Mallick - Member.
Asha Kiran represented by Director, Father Vijay
Kumar Nayak aged about 53 years, son of Sukru
Nayak of Village/ P:O: Kurtamgarh
PS: Tumudibandha, Dustrict – Kandhamal …………….. Complainant.
Versus.
1. Senior Branch Manager United Inida Insurance
Co. Ltd., Bhubaneswar Branch 10, Satyanagar, Bhubaneswar -751001.
2. Regional Manager United India Insurance Co. Ltd, Odisha Region,
UTI Building 5th Floor, Rammandir square, Bhubaneswar- 751001.
3. Chairman / Chief manager United India Insurance Co. Ltd Regd &
Head office, 24, Whites Road, Chennai- 60001.
………………….. Opp. Parties
For the Complainant: Sri Dibakar Parichha Advocate and his associates.
For the Opp. Parties: Sri B.K Mohanty Advocate
Date of Order: 16-08-2014
O R D E R
The case of the Complainant in short is that he is the owner of one Bolero motor vehicle bearing Registration No. OR-02-AV-6632 being the Director of Asha Kiran, a registered organization. He was using the said vehicle for official purpose of Asha Kiran. The vehicle was insured under the United India Insurance Ltd and the Complainant has paid Rs. 13,695/- as the premium of the said Insurance on 29-11-2010. The said policy bearing No. 0343013110P001463818 was operative from 01-12-2010 to 30-11-2011. It covers the liability of the company in respect of claim due to any accident to the tune of Rs. 07, 50,000/-. On 26-08-2011 at 10.40 P.M there was an accident at Nandagiri of G. Udayagiri due to heavy rain and damaged road for which the said vehicle was damaged. The Complainant produced the said vehicle before Aditya Motors who gave an estimation of Rs.03,36,262.57 paise for repair. On 13-08-2011 the Complainant intimated the Opposite Party for inspection. Accordingly one surveyer inspected the damaged vehicle and reported the matter for settlement of claim .The Opposite Party gave a letter on 17-08-2012 repudiating the claim on the ground that the vehicle was categorized as a private type of vehicle but the Insurance policy has taken for
-2-
commercial type of vehicle and as per registration certificate the vehicle bears No. OR-02-AB-6632 but it bears No.OR-02-AV-6632 in the Insurance policy. Hence, this complaint is filed by the Complainant claiming Rs. 04, 96,300/- towards repair of his vehicle and compensation with 12 % annum interest due to negligence and deficiency in service of the Opposite parties
The case of the Opposite Parties as per their version is that the Insurance Company has issued policy for the vehicle bearing No. OR-02-AB-6632 but not for the vehicle Bearing No. OR-02-AV-6632. The Complainant has not submitted his claim on 26-08-2011 in proper form along with relevant documents as desired by the Opposite parties. Apart from this the Complainant has not given the valid driving licence of the driver who was driving the vehicle at the time of accident. The vehicle was registered as a private type of vehicle and not for use of commercial purpose. The policy was issued to the Complainant as per proposal submitted by him. Hence, the Opposite Parties are not liable to pay any claim amount and compensation to the Complainant as they have not committed any wrong and deficiency in service. Hence, they prayed to dismiss the complaint.
In this case the Complainant has not filed any affidavit in token of his evidence. We have heard the learned counsel of both the parties. We have carefully gone through the complaint petition, the version filed by the Opposite Parties and the documents filed by the Complainant in support of his case. The surveyor report is not available in the case record. It is admitted fact that the Complainant could not produce the original licence of the driver as he has left the job from the organization of the Complainant. It is also admitted that the Registration certificate was issued to the Complainant in connection with OR-02-AV-6632 and the Insurane Policy was granted in favor of the vehicle bearing No. OR-02-AB-6632. The plea of the Complainant is that due to wrong typing the vehicle No. OR-02-AB-6632 was mentioned in the Insurance policy but the Engine No. and chassis No. was same in both the documents. So, wrong has been committed by the Opposite Parties but not by the Complainant.
In the light of above discussion it is clear that at the time of accident , the driver of the vehicle was not possessed with valid driving licence for which the Complainant failed to produce the same .It is well settled that lack of valid driving licence can vitiate insurance claim. In the said circumstances the O.P has not committed any deficiency in repudiating the claim of the Complainant .Hence, the complaint is dismissed being devoid of merit.
The C.C is disposed of accordingy. Supply free copies of this order to both the parties.
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
