Karnataka

Bidar

CC/58/2016

Patil Kshemling S/o Mahadavarao Basavakalyan - Complainant(s)

Versus

Shri Ram General Insurance Co.Ltd. Rajasthan - Opp.Party(s)

Subhsh V. Gabadi

18 Aug 2017

ORDER

  ::BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,

AT BIDAR::

 

 

                                                                                                                                                                 C.C.No. 58/2016

 

                                                                                                                                                         Date of filing : 06.08.2016

 

                                                                                                                                                           Date of disposal : 18.08.2017

 

 

P R E S E N T:-             (1) Shri. Jagannath Prasad Udgata,

                                                                              B.A., LL.B.,

                                                                                                   President.

    

                                        (2) Shri. Shankrappa (Halipurgi),

                                                                               B.A.LL.B.,

                                                                                           Member.

                                   

                                   

COMPLAINANT/S:           Patil Kshemling S/o Mahadavrao,

                                                Age : 50 years, Occ:Transport Business,

                                                R/o H.No.60, Gadlegaon (B),

                                                Tq. Basavakalyan, Dist Bidar.

 

                                       ( By Shri. S.V.Gabadi Adv.)

                                                          VERSUS

 

OPPONENT/S:       1)        Shriram General Insurance Co. Ltd.,

                                                E-8, EPIP, RIICO Industrial Area, 

                                                Sitapura, Rajasthan-302022 India.

 

                                    2)        Shriram General Insurance Co. Ltd.,

                                                Biradar Complex, IInd Floor,

                                                Near Holkunde Hospital, Main Road,

                                                Basavakalyan, Tq. Basavakalyan,

                                                Dist. Bidar

 

   

                                              ( By Shri. S.Wilson, Advocate)

 

 

 

 

                               

::   J U D G M E N T  : :

 

By Shri. Jagannath Prasad Udgata, President.

 

 

1.             The complainant is before this Forum alleging deficiency of service in the part of the O.Ps.1 and 2, by filing a complaint U/s.12 of the C.P. Act., 1986.

 

2.          The sum total of the case of the complainants is as hereunder:

                        The complainant is the owner of Ashok Leyland Lorry bearing Regn.No.MH-25/B-9521 having chassis No.TPR 245273. Engine No.TPH498739, and for the safety and security of goods to be transported therein, he purchased Insurance Policy bearing No10012/31/14/041545, valid from 14.3.2014 to 13.3.2015.   The O.Ps having office at Sitapura, Rajasthan and Branch at Basavakalyan has collected the premium. Unfortunately on 12.3.2015, at 2:00 am the vehicle met with an accident on Kadapa to Kurnool bypass Road at Mydukur village, and Mandal of YSR District while proceedings towards Nasik with battery load from Renigunta and the vehicle skidded, fell on left side of the road and got badly damaged.   The jurisdictional Mydukur (U) P.S registered a case in Crime No80/2015 U/Sec.279, 336 of IPC and filed Charge Sheet.    The said incident was informed to the O.Ps.  The OPs sent their surveyor to inspect and asses the damages and in the meantime, the complainant got repaired the damaged vehicle incurring expenses of more than Rs.3,00,000/-.  During this period, the complainant suffered loss of net earnings of about Rs.1,50,000/- and thus the complainant filed damages claim before OPs.  The repudiation of the claim of complainant by the O.Ps. is stated to be on false and incorrect grounds that, the driver of the vehicle of complainant was not holding valid and effective driving licence.  Per contra the complainant claims, factually the driver was holding valid and effective driving licence, and the same was produced along with the claim, which proves the deficiency of services on the part of the O.Ps.   Hence, the complaint for compensation etc., as prayed in the complaint.

 

3.         The Opponents entering into defence on receipt of Court notice filed version and admitted the insurance purchased by the complainant and its validity.   The OPs contended that, the complainant be put to strict proof in respect of accident.   One Surveyor Mr. S.M. Sheelwant of O.Ps’., had visited the damaged vehicle and after making detailed inspection submitted report assessing damages at Rs.1,69,000/-.   The OPs denied the expenditure incurred by the complainant to his vehicle to the exlent Rs.3,00,000/-, loss of earnings and filing of the claim for damages.   The O.Ps contended that, they had rightly repudiated the claim for damages of the complainant as the driver of the damaged vehicle did not possess valid driving licence at the time of alleged accident.  The copy of the driving licence of driver of the damaged vehicle was produced by the complainant himself clearly shows that, it had expired in the year 2014 itself, therefore, the claim was repudiated.  Hence there is no deficiency in service in repudiating the claim of complainant.  There is no cause to file the complaint.   The damages claimed by the complainant is exorbitant, as the independent surveyor and loss assessor submitted a report of damages at Rs.1,69,000/-.   Hence, the O.Ps prays to dismiss the complaint with costs.
4. The complainant to substantiate the fact of Insurance claim, fact of accident and damages sustained has filed documents listed at the end of this order.  He also has filed evidence affidavit and written arguments.   After filing the versions the O.P.s have neither filed the evidence affidavits or written arguments.  Even the survey report of Mr. Sheelwant as mentioned in the versions has not been filed by the opponents.

 

5. Considering the rival contentions of the feuding parties the following points arise for our consideration:-

 

 

 

1. Does the complainant prove that, O.P.s have committed deficiency of service?

 

2. What order ?

 

 

 

6.          Our answers to the points stated above are as follows:-

 

1.  In the affirmative.
2. As per the final order, owing to the following:

 

:: REASONS ::

 

7.         Point.No.1:   From the corollary of events described by the complainant coupled with the documents,  it is crystal clear that, he was the registered owner of Transport vehicle bearing Regn. No.MH 25B 9521 (Ex.P.2) and the same was having authorisation (Ex.P.3) and certificate of fitness (Ex.P.4).   The  complainant had obtained Insurance of his vehicle bearing Policy No.10012/31/14/041545, valid from 14.03.2014 to 13.03.2015 (Ex.P.7) and the IDV was declared as Rs.9,50,000/-.  The vehicle meeting with accident and sustaining damages while being plied on Kadappa to Kurnool bypass road on 12.03.2015 at about 2.00 a.m., F.I.R. was registered and charge sheet was filed by registering the case vide case No.80 of 14.03.2015 in jurisdictional Mydukur P.S.,YSR District, A.P.(Ex.P.1).

 

8.         The complainant claims , afterwards, the Surveyor of the opponent had come to the spot and had made inspections following which, he got his vehicle repaired spending a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- and due to the vehicle remaining idle sustained income loss to the tune of Rs.1,50,000/-. 

     

9.                The Insurance Company has repudiated the insurance claim on the ground that, the driver of the vehicle by name Basawraj was not holding a valid D.L.at the time of the accident.(Ex.P.8).

 

10.                   The complainant has submitted the D.L. at Ex.P.5 from which, said Basawaraj was holding D.L.to drive LMV, TRANS PORT  and PSVBUS is evident.  The complainant also prior to dictation of order on 11.08.2017 has submitted a document captioned as History sheet for Drivers (Ex.P.6) from the R.T.O. Bidar, from which it is evident that, the Driver Basawaraj was in fact holding D.L. to drive Transport Vehicle from13.12.2014 valid till 12.12.2017.  This clinches the whole issue.  The accident occurring on 12.03.2015, it is unfair in the part of the opponent to repudiate the claim of Insurance on imaginary grounds and we are of the firm opinion that, by doing so, the opponents have committed deficiency in service and we answer the point accordingly.

 

 

11.       Point No.2.  The complainant has claimed the repairs of the damages sustained by the vehicle in a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- income loss at Rs.1,50,000/-, compensation at Rs.25,000/- and costs, at Rs.10,000/-.  We find, the calculation is at a higher side without any justification.  Though the complainant has produced receipts, the aggregate of which is in a sum of Rs.4,60,100/-,  we find vide Ex.P.19, his repairer M/s Farooq Body Builders has been paid a sum of Rs.2,40,000/- towards complete body material and labour and cabin Belgam Top material and labour.  To this to be added the amounts of the other documents at Ex.P.10 to P.18 which works out in a sum of Rs.2,10,000/- aggregating total repair cost at Rs.4,50,000/-.  However, the complainant claiming Rs.3,00,000/- under that head we propose to allow him that much.  The O.P. though had claimed about a surveyors assessment of the damages at Rs.1,69,000/- the same was never produced and hence we took into  account the bills of the repair at Ex.P.10 to Ex.P.19 and the Insured’s’ claim.  Consequentially, we proceed to pass the following:

 

 

          :: ORDER ::

 

1. The complaint is allowed in part.
2. The O.P. is directed to reimburse a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- together with an interest @ 12% p.a. on the said sum calculated from the date of complaint i.e. 11.08.2016 till date of realisation;
3. The O.P. is further directed to pay a compensation of Rs.10,000/- and litigation expenses of Rs.5,000/- to the complainant.
4. Four weeks time is granted to comply this order.

  

  

   (Typed to our dictation then corrected, signed by us and then pronounced in     

     the open Forum on this 18^th day of August-2017)

 

 

 

   Sri. Shankrappa H.                                             Sri. Jagannath Prasad                                  

Member.                                                                President.                                                            

 

Documents produced by the complainant

1. Ex.P.1- C.C. of F.I.R. and charge sheet.
2. Ex.P.2- Copy of registration certificate.
3. Ex.P.3- Copy of Authorisation Certificate of N.P.(Goods)
4. Ex.P.4- Copy of certificate of fitness.    
5. Ex.P.5- Copy of D.C. of Baswaraj.
6. Ex.P.6- Original History sheet for Drivers from the R.T.O. Bidar 
                 filed on 07.08.2017.
7. Ex.P.7- Copy of certificate of Insurance.
8. Ex.P.8- Copy of certificate of Insurance.
9. Ex.P.9- Estimate of M/s Farooq Motor Body.
10. Ex.P.10 to P.18- Miscellaneous Bills.

11.Ex.P.19- Repair bills of M/s Farooq Motors.

 

 

Documents produced by the Opponent/s

 

    - Nil -

 

 

Sri. Shankrappa H.,                                             Sri. Jagannath Prasad,                                  

       Member.                                                                      President.