BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, MYSORE-570023

CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO.587/2015

DATED ON THIS THE 22^nd September 2017

      Present:  1) Sri. H.M.Shivakumara Swamy

B.A., LLB., - PRESIDENT   

    2) Smt. M.V.Bharathi                    

                                   B.Sc., LLB., -  MEMBER

                     3) Sri. Devakumar.M.C.                  

                                            B.E., LLB., PGDCLP,    - MEMBER

Sri DEVAKUMAR.M.C,

Member  

1.     The complainant has filed the complaint under section 12 of the C.P.Act, 1986, against the opposite parties, alleging deficiency in service and seeking a direction to pay Rs.1,70,000/- towards repair charges in respect of the insured vehicle and damages for a sum of Rs.10,000/- with interest @ 24% p.a. with the cost of the proceedings and other reliefs.
2.    The complainant’s vehicle insured with opposite party company, met with an accident, while returning from Mumbai to Mandya, on 26.05.2013.  The vehicle was badly damaged.  The goats and sheeps carried, were died on the spot.  Immediately, the opposite party was informed with all relevant particulars.
3.     The vehicle was repaired at a cost of Rs.1,70,000/- and the loss of the dead animals were calculated at Rs.4,50,000/-.  A claim under the insurance policy was made submitting the relevant documents.  The opposite parties repudiated the claim, hence the complaint seeking reliefs.
4.     The opposite party No.2 filed its version denying the allegations, admits the issue of insurance policy in respect of the complainant’s vehicle for the period 03.08.2012 to 02.08.2013.  The occurrence of accident was intimated on 07.06.2013.  The surveyor/loss verified the documents.  The surveyor asked the complainant to call after dismantling, to assess the exact loss assessor inspected the vehicle at the garage and also duly but not informed.  After the repair, a claim of Rs.1,70,000/- was made.  Since the vehicle was more than 5 years old, after the admissible depreciation, the opposite party assessed the loss at Rs.55,120/-, towards the repair charges. 
5.      Further, submits the claim of loss of Rs.4,50,000/- towards the dead animals can not be considered, as they does not covered under the insurance policy.  As such, the complainant is not entitled for repair expenses and also the compensation for the mental agony.  Hence, prays for dismissal of the complaint.
6.     To establish the facts, the complainant lead evidence by filing affidavit and relied on documents.  The opposite party No.2 also lead evidence filing affidavit.  Complainant filed the written arguments.  Heard the oral submission of both side counsel.  Perusing the material on record matter posted for orders.
7.    The points arose for our consideration are:-

1. Whether the complainant establishes the deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties, in not settling the claim made towards repair charges in respect of his vehicle and thereby he is entitled for the reliefs sought?
2. To What order?

8.    Our findings on the aforesaid points are as follows:

Point No.1 :- Partly in the affirmative.

Point No.2 :- As per final order for the following

:: R E A S O N S ::

9.    Point No.1:- The complainant’s vehicle met with an accident on 26.05.2013, while returning from Mumbai to Mandya.  The vehicle was very badly damaged and due to the impact of the accident about 40 goats and 5 sheep, which were carried in the vehicle died on the spot.
10. The vehicle had the insurance policy coverage as on the date of accident.  The opposite party was informed about the accident, who inturn appointed a licensed surveyor to inspect the damage to the vehicle and asked the complainant to call him after dismantling, to make an exact assessment of loss.  The vehicle was shifted to Mysore and repaired at different service points.  A sum of Rs.1,70,000/- was spent towards repair charges.
11. The loss of animals was estimated at Rs.4,50,000/-.  A claim form was submitted with all relevant documents, was repudiated by opposite party, vide letter dated 18.11.2013 on the grounds of violation of the policy terms and conditions.  Hence, the complaint seeking reliefs.
12. The 2^nd opposite party admitted the issue of insurance policy in respect of the complainant’s vehicle, and the same was subject to terms and conditions.  The accident was informed on 07.06.2013 i.e. after the lapse of about 13 days.  No opportunity was given to ascertain the damages caused, inspite of intimation and demand made vide letter dated 23.08.2013.  The surveyor assessed the loss based on the applicable depreciation, damages and considering the rubber/nylon/plastic items.  Fibre items, as per the terms and conditions of the policy, at Rs.55,120/-.  Further, as the policy never covers the risk caused to the animals, which was damaged, the complainant not entitled to receive any compensation for the same.  Hence, the claim was repudiated vide letter dated 18.11.2013.  As such, prayed for dismissal of the complaint with costs.
13. Admittedly, the complainant’s vehicle got damaged in the accident occurred on Pune-Bangalore road near Udatare Village, Binj, Sitara District, Maharashtra State, on 26.05.2013.  About 40 goats and 5 sheeps, being carried were died on the spot due to the impact of the accident.  The jurisdictional police registered the complaint.  The damaged vehicle was shifted by towing to Mysore, where the vehicle was repaired at various service centres by spending a total sum of Rs.1,70,000/-.  The occurrence of the accident  was informed to the opposite party on 07.06.2013, i.e. after the lapse of about 13 days.  The policy prescribes an intimation about the occurrence of loss or damages, after 48 hours as delayed intimation as per the terms and conditions.  As such, the opposite party rightly repudiated the claims on the ground of violation of policy terms and conditions. 
14. Further, based on the bills and other documents put forth, and considering the applicable depreciation, the surveyor assessed the loss at Rs.55,120/- as against the claim of Rs.1,70,000/-.  Since, the policy was inforce on the date of occurrence of the accident, though there is delay in intimation about the incident, the opposite parties bound to indemnify the loss suffered, in accordance with the assessment made by the surveyor.  In view of the same, the complainant is entitled to receive Rs.55,120/- towards the expenses incurred in getting repair the vehicle, with compensation for the deficiency in service and mental agony.     Accordingly, Point No.1 is answered partly in the affirmative.
15.  Point No.2:- In view of the observations on point No.1, we proceed to pass the following order:-

:: O R D E R ::

1. The complaint is allowed in part.
2. The opposite parties are jointly and severally directed to pay Rs.55,120/- along with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of filing this complaint till this date, to the complainant, within 45 days of this order.  In default to comply, the opposite parties shall pay penalty of Rs.100/- per day until compliance. 
3. The opposite parties are jointly and severally shall pay Rs.2,000/- compensation for the deficiency in service and Rs.2,000/- towards mental agony and hardship caused and Rs.1,000/- towards cost of the litigation to the complainant within 45 days of this order.  Failing to comply, the opposite parties are liable to pay interest at 10% p.a. on the said total sum of Rs.5,000/-, until compliance.
4. In case of default to comply this order, the opposite parties to undergo imprisonment and also liable for fine under section 27 of the C.P.Act, 1986.
5. Give the copies of this order to the parties, as per Rules.

(Dictated to the Stenographer transcribed, typed by her, transcript corrected by us and then pronounced in open court on this the 22^nd September 2017)