Case No.CC/392/2012

Date of Institution:-09.10.2012

Order Reserved on :- 02.04.2024

           Date of Order :-08.10.2024

IN THE MATTER OF:

Sh. SubhashChanderRai

S/o Sh. ShyamDevRai,

R/o 18, Type-2 Quarter,

Masjid Moth, AIIMS,

New Delhi – 110049.

          …..Complainant

VERSUS

1. State Bank of India

Through its General Manager,

Ansari Nagar (AIIMS Campus),

New Delhi – 110029.

2. Universal Sompo General Insurance Co. Ltd.

Through its Chairman,

Ground Floor, Enkay Towers,

B-B1, VanijyaNikunj, Phase-V,

Gurgaon – 122016.

Regd. Office at:

208, Crystal Plaza,

Opp. Infinity Mall, Andheri West,

Mumbai – 400 058.

… Opposite Parties

O R D E R

Per R. C. YADAV , MEMBER

1. The brief facts of the case are thatthe complainant maintains the bank account with OP-1/SBI bank being S.B. A/c No. 35848 in the name of complainant. The complainant had issued a cheque bearing no. 387523 dated 19.01.2010 for an amount of Rs.7,070/- in favour of OP-2 towards the premium for comprehensive policy.  The OP-2 pursuant to the said cheque issued a policy bearing no. 2311/50419750/00/000 being a policy for motor private car package policy on 21.01.2010 with validity till 20.01.2011 in respect of the vehicle of the complainant bearing registration no. DL 8CM5391(Tata Indica DLS). On 02.03.2010, the complainant visited his friend at Laxmi Nagar with his said car and parked his car around 11.30 p.m. near the flat of his friend and in the morning at about 7.00 a.m. when the complainant came down and found that his car was stolen.  The complainant has lodged a complaint in Shakarpur Police Station which was converted into an FIR No. 173/10 dated 05.03.2010 u/s 379 IPC. The police had investigated the matter and filed the final report dated 19.03.2010 to the effect that they could not get any leading evidence or clue regarding stolen vehicle, therefore they filed untraceable report and the investigation was closed.  On 26.03.2010, the complainant wrote to the regional transport authority, Ashok Viharregarding the stolen of his vehicle and requested the authority not to transfer the said vehicle in favour of any person and keep the registration file of the vehicle in safe custody. On 12.03.2010, the complainant lodged the insurance claim in respect of the stolen car with the OP-2 and the OP-2 had appointed Mr. G. B. Mathur& Co. to investigate the said matter and vide letter dated 29.09.2010 the OP-2  for the first time intimated the complainant that the cheque bearing 387523 dated 19.01.2010 for Rs.7,070/- drawn on OP-1/SBI, Ansari Nagar, New Delhi has been dishonoured for the reason being “Other reason (issuing branch name required)” which was shocking to the complainant and the OP-2 declined the insurance coverage and did not process the insurance claim in this regard. The complainant was shocked due to above belated information by the OP-2 and immediately contacted the OP-2 to know as to what are the ‘other reasons’ for the dishonour of cheque, the official of OP-2 told not to worry about the dishonour of cheque and asked the complainant to issue a DD/pay order in respect of the said dishonored cheque and complainant was assured that the policy will be enforced from the earlier date i.e. 21.01.2010.  The complainant accordingly their advice prepared a DD/pay order for a sum of Rs.7,070/- dated 04.10.2010 favoring OP-2 drawn on Allahabad Bank, A-15/9 & 10 CSC Sector-44, Noida, UP and deposited on 04.10.2024 in the office of the OP-2. The OP-2 kept silent after 04.10.2010 till the last week of January, 2011 when it sent the policy mentioning the date of issuance of policy as to be 22.01.2011 against the demand draft delivered on 04.10.2010 and made the policy effective with retrospective effect with effect from 04.10.2010 instead of 21.01.2010 as promised. It is pertinent to mention that the break in the insurance coverage period requires mandatory inspection of the vehicle.  The OP-2 has now taken illegal and non-factual stand that the subsequent policy coverage w.e.f. 04.10.2010 and not w.e.f. 21.01.2010 and has declined to process the claim of the theft of the car of the claimant and thus the complainant has suffered a loss as the car was insured for a sum of Rs.2,97,000/- and complainant is entitled to the said amount alongwith interest @ 24% p.a. w.e.f. 19.03.2010.  The complainant contacted the OP-2 to provide the copy of the cheque returning memo to know the exact reason of dishonor of cheque.  The complainant was shocked on receiving of the cheque return memo from the bankers of the OP-2 i.e. Corporation Bank, Proddatur-0901 as it was also intimated by OP-1 that the said cheque to the banker of the insurance company showing the reason of dishonor of the cheque as to be “A/c No. (number) invalid” and “not drawn on us”.  The complainant obtained information through RTI application dated 26.09.2011 regarding the cheque no. 387523 dated 19.01.2010 that as per record of OP-1 the cheque in question was not presented to SBI, Ansari Nagar, New Delhi branch and new account no. in respect of the old account no. 35848 as mentioned on the cheque in question, is 10874683805. It clarifies that the OP-1 was negligent in not presenting the cheque in question and by taking a false plea that the cheque was containing an invalid account number and the bank of complainant has provided deficient in banking services.  The OP-2 has also provided deficient services in respect of insurance company and both the OPs are severally responsible and liable for the deficient services provided to the complainant.   The complainant has prayed for Rs.2,97,000/- towards the value of the car covered under the policy alongwith interest @ 18% p.a. from 19.03.2010 and Rs.1,00,000/- from each OP towards compensation for  mental harassment and costs of the complaint. 
2. Notice was served upon OPs.The OP-1 entered its appearance and filed written statement taking several preliminary objectionsincluding thatthe cheque no. 387523 dated 19.01.2010 for Rs.7,070/- was not presented for payment to the State Bank of India, Ansari Nagar, New Delhi, which is a home branch. Hence, there is no deficiency on part of the OP-1 and the name of OP-1 is liable to be deleted from the array of the parties. The OP-1 also stated that Corporation Bank, Mumbai who has presented the said cheque at Proddatur, Andhra Pradesh instead of OP-1/SBI, Ansari Nagar, New Delhi.  It is also stated that cheque bearing no. 387523 dated 19.01.2010 was presented by the Corporation Bank at Mumbai at Proddatur, Andhra Pradesh instead of presenting it with OP-1 branch at Ansari Nagar, New Delh, is not made the party.  Hence, there is no deficiency in service on part of the OP-1 and complaint is liable to be dismissed against OP No.1/SBI bank.
3. The OP-2 did not appear despite due service and proceeded Ex-parte vide order dated 11.03.2024.
4. The complainant has filed ex-parte evidence of OP-2 in support of his case.
5. In response to the written statement of OP-1, the complainant has filed rejoinder reiterating the allegations made in the complaint and denying the allegations leveled in the written statement.
6. Both the contesting parties have filed affidavit of evidence as well as written arguments in support of their respective case.
7. On 02.04.2024, the case was listed for arguments. None have appeared. Since the case is of 2012, we felt it prudent to decide the case due to long pendency of the present complaint. Hence, the order reserved.
8. We have carefully considered the material on record and thoroughly perused the documents placed on record.
9. It is the case of the complainant that hemaintains the bank account with OP-1 being S.B. A/c No. 35848 in the name of complainant. The complainant had issued a cheque bearing no. 387523 dated 19.01.2010 for an amount of Rs.7,070/- in favour of OP-2 towards premium in the comprehensive policy.  The OP-2 pursuant to the said cheque issued a policy bearing no. 2311/50419750/00/000 being a policy for motor private car package policy on 21.01.2010 with validity till 20.01.2011 in respect of the vehicle of the complainant bearing registration no. DL 8CM 5391(Tata Indica DLS). On 02.03.2010, the complainant visited his friend at Laxmi Nagar with his said car and parked his car around 11.30 p.m. near the flat of his friend and in the morning at about 7.00 a.m. when the complainant came down and found that his car was stolen.  The complainant has lodged a complaint in Shakarpur Police Station which was converted into an FIR No. 173/10 dated 05.03.2010 u/s 379 IPC.  The police investigated the matter and filed the final report dated 19.03.2010 to the effect that they could not get any leading evidence or clue regarding stolen vehicle, therefore they filed untraceable report and the investigation was closed.  On 26.03.2010, the complainant wrote to the regional transport authority, Ashok Vihar, New Delhi  regarding the stolen of his vehicle and requested the authority not to transfer the said vehicle in favour of any person and keep the registration file of the vehicle in safe custody. On 12.03.2010, the complainant lodged the insurance claim in respect of the stolen car with the OP-2 and the OP-2 had appointed Mr. G. B. Mathur& Co. to investigate the said matter and vide letter dated 29.09.2010 the OP-2  for the first time intimated the complainant that the cheque bearing 387523 dated 19.01.2010 for Rs.7070/- drawn on OP-1/SBI, Ansari Nagar, New Delhi has been dishonoured for the reason being “Other reason (issuing branch name required)” which was shocking to the complainant and the OP-2 declined the insurance coverage and did not process the insurance claim in this regard. The complainant was shocked due to above belated information by the OP-2 immediately contacted the OP-2 to know as to what are the ‘other reasons’ for the dishonor of cheque, the official of OP-2 told not to worry about the dishonor of cheque and asked the complainant to issue a DD/pay order in respect of the said dishonored cheque and complainant was assured that the policy will be enforced from the earlier date i.e. 21.01.2010.  The complainant accordingly their advice prepared a DD/pay order for a sum of Rs.7,070/- dated 04.10.2010 favoring OP-2 drawn on Allahabad Bank, A-15/9 & 10 CSC Sector-44, Noida, UP and deposited on 04.10.2024 in the office of the OP-2. The OP-2 kept silent after 04.10.2010 till the last week of January, 2011 when it sent the policy mentioning the date of issuance of policy as to be 22.01.2012 against the demand draft delivered on 04.10.2010 and made the policy effective with retrospective effect w.e.f. 04.10.2010 instead of 21.01.2010 as promised. It is pertinent to mention that the break in the insurance coverage period requires mandatory inspection of the vehicle.  The OP-2 has now taken illegal and non-factual stand that the subsequent policy coverage w.e.f. 04.10.2010 and not w.e.f. 21.01.2010 and has declined to process the claim of the theft of the car of the claimant and thus the complainant has suffered a loss as the car was insured for a sum of Rs.2,97,000/- and complainant is entitled to the said amount alongwith interest @ 24% p.a. w.e.f. 19.03.2010.  The complainant contacted the OP-2 to provide the copy of the cheque returning memo to know the exact reason of dishonor of cheque.  The complainant was shocked on receiving of the cheque return memo from the bankers of the OP-2 i.e. Corporation Bank, Proddatur-0901 as it was also intimated by OP-1 that the said cheque to the banker of the insurance company showing the reason of dishonor of the cheque as to be “A/c No. (number) invalid” and “not drawn on us”.  The complainant obtained information through RTI application dated 26.09.2011 regarding the cheque no. 387523 dated 19.01.2010 that as per record of OP-,1 the cheque in question was not presented to SBI, Ansari Nagar, New Delhi branch and new account no. in respect of the old account no. 35848 as mentioned on the cheque in question, is 10874683805 . It clarifies that the OP-1 was negligent in not presenting the cheque in question and by taking a false plea that the cheque was containing an invalid account number and the bank of complainant has provided deficient in banking services.  The OP-2 has also provided deficient services in respect of insurance company and both the OPs are severally responsible and liable for the deficient services provided to the complainant.
10. It is the case of the complainant that as per RTI application filed by the complainant, information was provided by OP-1 that “new account number can be found out in case old account number is correctly mentioned on the cheque.” But the OP-1 failed to generate the new account number and dishonoured the cheque, which clearly deficiency in service on part of the OP-1.  
11. The complainant has paid consideration for his vehicle insurance to the OP-2 but the policy was not renewed and meanwhile the car of the complainant was stolen and the OP-2 repudiated the claim of the complainant on the ground that the cheque of the complainant was dishonoured. The bank of OP-2 sent the cheque to Andhra Pradesh instead of Ansari Nagar, New Delhi and the official of OP-2 has taken DD on 04.10.2024 with the assurance that the claim will be settled. This is clearly deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on part of the OP-2. The OP-2 has received consideration for the insurance policy and later on received DD on Rs.7070/- with the assurance that policy will be generated from earlier date i.e. 21.01.2010. 
12. Accordingly, we allow the complaint and direct the OP-1 and OP-2 jointly or severally to pay Rs.2,97,000/- (Rupees Two Lakh Ninety Seven Thousand)to the complainant alongwth an interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of date of filing of complaintandRs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) as lumpsum for mental agony and litigation charges within 45 days from the date of receipt of the order failing which OPs shall be liable to pay entire amount alongwithinterest @ 9% p.a. till realization.

• Copy of the order be given/sent to the parties as per rule.
• The file be consigned to Record Room.
• Announced in the open Court on 08.10.2024.