Haryana

Ambala

CC/385/2017

Raj Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

Shriram Gen Insurance Co Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

20 Nov 2018

ORDER

BEFORE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, AMBALA.

                                        Complaint No.385 of 2017

                                        Date of institution:-09.11.2017

                                        Date of decision: - 20.11.2018

Raj Kumar son of Sh.Kundan Ram r/o 27 village Toka Tehsil Nariangarh District Ambala, Haryana.

                                                           ...Complainant.

Versus

1.Shriram General Insurance Co.Ltd.Regd.& Corpt Office E-8, RIICO industrial Area, Sitapur Jaipur through its General Manager.

2.Shriram General Insurance Co.Ltd. 1^st Floor, Plot No.57/75, Thapar Colony, Workshop Road, Yamunanagar Branch, Yamunanagar, Haryana through its Branch Manager.

 

                                                            …Opposite parties.

Complaint under section 12 of

 

Before:     Sh.Dina Nath Arora, President. 

                   Sh.Pushpender Kumar, Member,              

                   Dr.Sushma Garg, Member.              

               

Present: -  Sh.Ankush Gupta, Advocate for complainant.

                Sh.Mohinder Bindal, Advocate for OPs.

                               

Order

                In nutshell, the facts of the complaint are that the complainant is owner of truck/ tipper No.HR37D-0078 and he had purchased an insurance policy having validity for the period from 14.10.2016 to 13.10.2017. On 08.11.2016 an accident took place due to spark in High Tension wire and truck/tipper got damaged completely. Fire brigade was called which managed the over the fire. Regarding this DDR dated 08.11.2016 was also lodged wherein correction was made on 21.12.2015. The complainant had intimated the OPs regarding this incident and also submitted requisite documents but instead of honour the genuine claim the insurance company did not pass the same and gave false assurance to the complainant every time. The complainant got served legal notice upon them but to no avail. The act and conduct of the OPs clearly amounts to deficiency in service on their part.  In evidence, the complainant has tendered affidavit Annexure CA and documents Annexure C1 to Annexure C19.

2.             On notice OPs appeared and filed their joint reply wherein it has been submitted that a claim was reported by the complainant with regard to accident loss of vehicle i.e.tipper bearing No.HR37-D-0078 and thereafter surveyor Gurkirat Singh was deputed to assess the loss who inspected the vehicle in question and discussed the matter with complainant. After that one investigator Mr.Shobh Nath was also deputed to investigate the matter and to give fact finding report about the same but he found some contradictory information. On being confronted when the fuel tank on the left side and right side indicator was found intact, the complainant did not respond satisfactorily and also did not cooperate with the investigator. After scrutinizing and elaborating the whole facts, situation, records and evidence the different letters were written to clarification from electricity department about catching fire but all in vain. Under the insurance contract utmost good faith must be observed by the contracting parties and good faith forbids the insured from concealment, non-disclosure of facts which the party knows and from making any false statement. The complainant in order to put undue pressure has approached this Forum with unclean hands in order to wrongful gain. There is no deficiency in service on the part of insurance company. Other contentions have been controverted and prayer for dismissal of the complaint has been made. In evidence, the OPs have tendered affidavits Annexure RA, Annexure RB and documents Annexure R1 to Annexure R8.

3.             We have heard learned counsel for the parties gone through the material available on the case file.

4.             It is not disputed that complainant has purchased the policy from the respondents for the period 14.10.2016 to 13.10.2017 by paying the premium Rs.24908/- and insured the vehicle for Rs.20 lac as per Annexure C2. Complainant comes to this Forum with a plea that on 08.11.2016 one accident took place due to spark in the high tension wire and the insured truck/tipper No.HR37-D0078 got damaged due to fire. The driver of the complainant parked the truck in question in Smallson plant, Raipur Rani District Panchkula and a high tension wire of 11 KVA was passing over the same. To prove this fact complainant has placed on record copy of the DDR dated 08.11.2016 Annexure C5 and police officer has inspected the site and they have found that the matter is related to spark in high voltage wires and found the facts correct as per Annexure C5 and give the observation in this regard which has been placed on file as Annexure C5/A. The complainant approached to fire brigade office on the same day as per Annexure C4 they have controlled the fire. They have mentioned that vehicle in question has been fully burnt. In the present case OPs come with this plea that on the day of accident after receiving the intimation, claim of the complainant was duly entertained and Mr.Gurkirat Singh was deputed to assess the loss who inspected the vehicle in question. The OPs also deputed another investigator Sh.Sobh Nath and OPs have placed the copy of investigator report on the file but it is strange factor that OPs failed to produce the complete copy of the investigation report Annexure R3 even OPs failed to produce the surveyor report which was deputed by them immediately after receiving the claim application.  This Forum has also given the direction to the counsel for OPs to place on record complete copy of investigation report Annexure R3 and also place on record surveyor reports mention in the written statement which was prepared at the spot on 09.11.2016 by Gurkirt Singh Barar and another surveyor report assessing the loss on 18.11.2016 by Navneet Singh. This Forum has also given the direction to the complainant to produce the visible copy of report. Complete copy of daily log sheet of electricity department Annexure C15 where matter was reported that 11 KVA high tension wire got sparked and due to this one vehicle also got burnt completely and in order to ascertain this whether any mishappening had occurred due to sparking of 11 KVA wire or not so this Forum has also summoned the concerned electricity department SDO/JE to file the visible copy of the daily log sheet dated 08.11.2016 Annexure C-11/C-15 and he come present and made a statement that as per record of Nigam that at 6.05 AM information was received through telephone. He specifically mentioned in his statement that when they have received the intimation about mishappening due to sparking Mr.Kumar Giri JE was ordered to close the feeder where mishappening has occurred and further the restored the same at 8.20 AM. He placed on record visible copy of log register Annexure C16 and also clarified all mishappening in the vehicle due to sparking at point A,B and C on Annexure C16.

5.             We have also gone through the surveyor report alongwith photograps where he has assessed the loss after considering the estimate given by the complainant Rs.21,13,666/- and he considered the IRDI instructions and deducted 10 % of the depreciation as well as other parts 50 % as mentioned in assessment sheet and he assessed the actual loss Rs.18,09,578/-.

6.             The plea of the OPs that the body of the truck was made of steel and there was inflammable materials were loaded, therefore, the truck cannot catch fire and it is next to impossible that steel body can catch the fire. This Forum has put a query to the counsel for the OPs that if we took this plea as gospel truth then in that eventuality what was the reason for burning of the vehicle because the vehicle was parked at smallson screen plant, Raipur Rani but he failed to point out any reason for burning of the vehicle but he still reiterated the reason mentioned in the investigation report Annexure R15 and also stated that official of the electricity department has opined that no chance to catch the fire in iron body of the truck. But there is no detail report has been sought from the officer of department and not recorded the statement of JE who was present when the mishappening had occurred and closed the feeder and restore the same. Therefore, this plea of OPs is devoid of merit without disclosing the reasoning behind the fire.

7.             We come to this conclusion and the evidence adduced by the complainant Annexure C4 i.e. detailed report of fire office and DDR Annexure C5 was found correct as per police investigation report Annexure C5/A and also daily log sheet Annexure C16/tipping PRM alongwith surveyor report dated 09.11.2016 given by Gurkirat Singh and photographs which clearly establish the case of the complainant. Hence, we have no hesitation to hold that the damage to the truck in question occurred due to spark in high tension wire when the vehicle was parked in smallson screen plant. Therefore, insurance company has wrongly withheld the genuine claim of the complainant  further even their surveyor Navneet Singh has assessed the loss on 18.11.2016 to the tune of Rs.18,09,578/- Hence, the present complaint is partly allowed with costs which is assessed at Rs.10,000/- on account of mental agony, harassment and litigation expenses etc. The OPs are further directed to comply with the following orders:

1.To pay the amount of Rs.18,09,578/- (loss assessed by the surveyor) alongwith interest @ 9 % per annum from the date of filing of complaint till its realization.

2.Also to pay cost of Rs.10,000/- as assessed above,

3.The complainant is bound to handover the damaged vehicle alongwith original documents against valid receipt and complainant is also bound to submit to indemnity bond and surety bond to the OP after payment of awarded amount with costs. If OPs are liberty to get the RC transferred in their name if so desire at their own cost and complainant with cooperate to the OPs to transfer the vehicle.

 

Compliance of this order be made within 30 days from the date of receiving of the copy of this order. Copy of order be supplied to the parties under the rule. File be consigned to the record-room after due compliance.

 

Announced on: 20.11.2018

 

                                                               

PUSHPENDER KUMAR      SUSHMA GARG               D.N. ARORA MEMBER                                MEMBER                        PRESIDENT