Per Mr.B.S.Wasekar, Hon’ble President

1)                The present complaint has been filed by the complainant u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. According to the complainant, he had purchased Toyato Inova Car from Mr.Narendra M.Gawde for consideration of Rs.8 Lakhs in the month of April-2003.  After purchase, the vehicle was transferred in the name of the complainant on 22^nd December, 2012.  The vehicle was insured in the name of previous owner for the period 15^th September, 2011 to 15^th September, 2012.  The vehicle met to an accident on 1^st May, 2012 at 04.30 A.M.  The accident was reported to the police station and the police made investigation. The vehicle was completely damaged therefore the complainant submitted claim to the opponent for Rs.7 Lakhs.  The claim was repudiated by the opponent.  Therefore, the complainant has filed this complaint for recovery of Rs.7 Lakhs with interest at the rate of 18% per annum.

2)                The opponent appeared and filed written statement.  It is submitted that the policy was in the name of earlier owner.  It was not transferred in the name of complainant as per the provision under G.R.17 of India Motor Tariff.  Therefore, the complainant is not the consumer.  The complainant submitted the claim and the same was rejected as there was no policy in the name of the complainant.  There was no request from the complainant or the earlier owner for transfer of policy in the name of the complainant.  In case of package policy, own damage policy can be transferred in favour of the transferee only on the request alongwith consent of the transferor and on payment of necessary charges.  The insurance is the personal contract therefore the claim was rightly repudiated. 

3)      After hearing both the parties and after going through the record, following points arise for our consideration.

POINTS

REASONS

4) As to Point No. 1 & 2 :- In complaint, affidavit of evidence and written notes of argument, date of purchase and transfer of vehicle in the name of complainant in R.T.O. record is wrongly written.  As per the record produced by the complainant himself, the vehicle was transferred in his name in R.T.O. record on 22^nd November, 2011 and not on 22^nd February, 2012.  There is no dispute that the vehicle was insured in the name of previous owner Mr.Narendra M.Gawde.  The vehicle was purchased by the complainant and as per record produced by the complainant it was transferred in the name of complainant in R.T.O. record on 22^nd November, 2011.  The accident took place on 1^st May, 2012 at 04.30 A.M. i.e. five months after the transfer of vehicle in the name of complainant.  Admittedly, there was no request from the complainant or from previous owner for transfer of policy in the name of complainant till the date of accident.  Thus, the policy was in the name of previous owner on the day of accident.  Admittedly, the complainant has not followed the procedure laid down by G.R.No.17 of Indian Motor Tariff.  The claim of the complainant is for own damage.  The learned advocate for the opponent has submitted that in case of own damage there must be policy in the name of claimant.  The learned advocate for the opponent has placed reliance on the judgment of Hon’ble National Commission in Revision Petition No.3502 of 2009 in the case of New India Assurance Company Limited –Versus-Shaikh Dawood dated 21^st February, 2013.  In this judgment, the Hon’ble National Commission has laid down as under :

GR-10 was replaced by GR 17 under which the transferee has to apply for transfer of insurance policy in his name within 14 days of the transfer of the registration certificate in his name. Under GR 17, in the case of third party’s interest, the transfer is considered to be automatically. However, in the case of own damage, the transferee has to apply for transfer of insurance policy in his name.  GR 17 came into force w.e.f. 1.7.02

After discussing the judgments of Hon’ble Supreme Court and the Hon’ble National Commission, the Hon’ble National Commission has further laid down as under :

In view of the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act and the Tariff Regulations and the decisions of the Supreme Court, if the transferee fails to inform the Insurance Company about transfer of the Registration Certificate in his name and the policy is not transferred in the name of the transferee, then the Insurance Company cannot be held liable to pay the claim in the case of own damage of vehicle.   Petitioner Insurance Company was justified in repudiating the claim.

5)                Thus, as per the law laid down by the Hon’ble National Commission, if the policy is not transferred in the name of purchaser as per G.R.No.17 of India Motor Tariff, the claimant is not entitled for own damages. In the instant complaint before us, the vehicle was transferred in the month of November-2011 and the accident took place in the month of May-2012.  There was no request for transfer of a policy in the name of complainant.  Therefore, the opponent is not liable to satisfy the claim of the complainant.  The learned advocate for the complainant has placed reliance on the judgment of our State Commission in First Appeal No.A/12/611 Subhas B.Gawali –Versus- ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Limited dated 14^th December, 2012.  The above cited judgment of the Hon’ble National Commission is recent one i.e. dated 21^st February, 2013.  Therefore, the recent judgment of Hon’ble National Commission is binding on this Forum. 

6)                Thus, the complainant is not entitled for the relief as prayed.  Hence, we proceed to pass the following order.

ORDER

1. Complaint stands dismissed
2. Parties are left to bear their own costs.
3. Inform the parties accordingly.

Pronounced

Dated 5^th May, 2014