Karnataka
Chitradurga
CC/66/2020
Dadamma w/o Thimappa - Complainant(s)
Versus
TATA AIG Insurance Company Ltd., - Opp.Party(s)
Sri.G.V.Manjunath
09 Jun 2023
ORDER
COMPLAINT FILED ON 14/10/2020
DISPOSED ON 09/06/2023
BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHITRADURGA.
CC.NO:66/2020
DATED: 09th June 2023
PRESENT: Kum. H.N. MEENA, B.A., LL.B., PRESIDENT
Smt. B.H. YASHODA, B.A., LL.B., LADY MEMBER Sri. H.JANARDHAN, B.A.L., LL.B., MEMBER
……COMPLAINANT/S |
All are R/o Yadihally, Harappanahally Taluk, Bellary District. & Now Resident of Kumbeshwara Nagara, Hosadurga Town, Hosadurga Taluk, Chitradurga District.
| |
V/S | ||
.….OPPOSITE PARTY/S |
| |
:JUDGEMENT:
Delivered by Hon’ble President, Kum. H.N. MEENA.
The complainants have filed this complaint under section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 for seeking the relief by praying to direct the opponent to settle under the P.A. for owner cum driver benefit of Rs.15,00,000/-, as compensation of Rs.50,000/- on account of mental agony, loss of income till this date sustained by the complainants and also to direct the opponent to pay interest at 18% p.a. from the date of accident and pass such other reliefs as this Hon’ble Commission may deems fit and proper in the interest of Justice.
2. The brief facts of the complaint:
The complainant No.1 is the mother and complainant No.2 is the father, the complainant No.3 is the sister and complainant No.4 is the brother and complainant No.5 is the sister-in-law of the deceased Santhosh S/o Thimmappa @ Honnavar Thimmappa, who died on 20/04/2029 in a motor vehicle accident.
3. The complainant submits that, the deceased Santhosh was the owner cum driver of the Motor cycle bearing Reg. No. KA-17-HC0115 and the said Santhosh purchased the said motor cycle to develop his business and insured his vehicle bearing Reg. No. KA-17-HC-0115 with opponent Insurance Company vide Policy No. 454391/31/2020/1194 for the period from 30/01/2020 to 30/01/2021 and the said policy covers PA claim for an amount of Rs.15,00,000/-. Deceased Santhosh is a B.E, Graduate in E & C Branch studied at Kalpatharu Institute of Technology, Tiptur and after the completion of his graduation he worked at JIO Company and he drawn the hand sum salary and he worked there for a period of 3 years. After that he started his own marketing company at Davanagere under the name and style of ADHAVYA MARKETING PRIVATE LIMITED @ #2269, 2"P FLOOR, 7th MAIN ROAD, MCC-A BLOCK, DAVANAGERE and with his hard & sincere work he started to earn Rs.30,00,000/- per year from his said profession. The said Santhosh in order to develop his business through-out Karnataka has purchased the above said Motor cycle from and out of his earnings and he used the said vehicle for the development of his business, which is very much essential to him and also for his family also.
4. The complainants submits that, the ill-fated day on 20/04/2020 morning the said Santhosh was travelling in the motor cycle bearing Regn. No. KA-17-HC-0115 by riding himself from Hosadurga to Huliyaru and the said Santhosh was riding his motor cycle slowly, carefully by adopting all traffic as well as driving rules in the left side of the road. While moving so in between S. Neralakere Thotadamane village that too in front of Muniyappa’s garden land in Hosadurga - Srirampura Road at 7-45 AM, then a Lorry bearing Regn. No. TN-52-M-1699 was came in an opposite direction i.e., from Sriramapura side and the driver of the said lorry drove his vehicle in a rash and negligent manner with a heavy speed without adopting traffic as well as driving rules and he directly dashed to the Santhosh motor cycle rashly in the same speed and caused accident. And due to death of said accident, the said Santhosh sustained heavy head blood injuries, fractured wounds on all over his body and he died at spot without tolerating the pain. And the Motor vehicle drove by said Santhosh was also damaged entirely.
5. After the accident, Police Sub Inspector, Srirampura Police Station have registered a case in Cr.No.71/2020 Under Section 279, 304(A) IPC R/w 187 of IMV Act. After the Postmortem by the Medical Officer, Govt. Hospital, Hosadurga, the authorities were handed over the dead body of Santhosh In favour of the complainant No.2. And he with the help of his relatives brought the dead body in a hired vehicle and performed the obsequious as per the caste customs & performed the Death Ceremony also.
6. Complainants further submits that, after the accident the complainants immediately were intimated to the opponent’s Insurance Company through phone regarding the accident. Even in spite of the information given by the complainants to the opponent’s Insurance company with regard to the accident of the vehicle and the death of the owner - rider of the vehicle, the Opponent’s Insurance company authority have not made any arrangement to pay the PA claim amount to the complainants - being the LR’s of deceased Santhosh. That the said Insurance company has collected the PA premium amount for owner-driver and the sum insured is Rs.15,00,000/-.
7. Complainants further submits that, the Opponent being the Insurance company, is legally bound to pay the PA sum insured amount of Rs.15,00,000/- to the complainants being the LR’s of deceased Santhosh, due to death of PA sum insured person - Sri. SANTHOSH in the motor vehicle accident. But, the Opponent’s Insurance for the reasons best known to himself, postponing the same with an ulterior motive. The complainants being the legal heirs of deceased Santhosh are legally entitle for the above said claim from the opponent as per law. Thereupon the complainant have also filed a petition on 27/07/2020 in writing to the opponent Insurance, Inspite of service also, they failed to pay the said amount to the complainant. Hence, they issued a legal notice to the Opponent through their counsel on 25/08/2020 and the said notice also served on the Opponent. In spite of that also, the opponent Insurance company has not settled the claim nor repudiated the claim of the complainant, nor replied to the said notice, The complainants also submitted all the necessary papers i.e., Insurance Policy copy, DL of driver, RC copy, entire police records. Even that also, the Opponent insurance company has not settled any claim of the complainant for the benefit under personal accident.
8. After that the complainant has visited number of times to the Opponent’s office at Bengaluru for settlement of the claim. But, the opponent has failed to settle the claim of the complainant for the reasons best known to them, though the opponent is legally bound to pay the claim amount as stated supra as per Law. The cause of action for this complaint has arose on 20/04/2020 the date of accident and also the date of death of said Santhosh and also on subsequent dates i.e., on 27/07/2020 the date of requisition by complainant and on 25/08/2020 the date of legal notice; and inspite of that the opponent has failed to settle the claim amount to the complainant, hence filed this complaint.
9. After registering the complaint, The Hon’ble Commission has issued Notice to opponent, notice duly served to opponent. Wherefore, opponent counsel have filed their version on 07/01/2021 as follows.
10. The complaint of the complainant is false, frivolous, vexatious & baseless. And complaint deserves to be dismissed in Toto. The complainant to be put to strict proof of the same. That the complaint is premature and no proper opportunity was provided to answering respondent for assessment of claim in accordance to terms and condition of policy. That complainant's son had obtained the policy with policy No. 0189520180 and has insured his vehicle with this respondent. That the answering respondent has no knowledge that insured Santosh S/o Thimmappa died on 20-4-2020 due to accidental injuries while riding the said vehicle. It is vehemently denied that complainant had informed the said matter to the respondent authority for settling the claim and instead of settling the claim respondent intentionally avoiding for settling the claim and complainant had approached the respondent several times and knowing fully well the respondent have not settled the claim of the complainant, in this regard the complainant be put to strict proof of the same by producing the relevant documents.
11. It is denied that, complainant has approached several times for settling the matter even then opponent has not settle the claim which is nothing but deficiency in service, negligence & unfair trade practice are all false, in this regard complainant put to strict proof of the same by producing the relevant documents. There is no cause of action to file this complaint. The prayer made by the complainant for compensation is all false, baseless and imaginary one and hence complainant is not entitled said relief. The amount of compensation as claimed in the complaint is highly exorbitant baseless & imaginary and not according to schedule. The complainant has filed this complaint only with a view to make illegal gain as such she may be put to strict proof of the same.
12. Opponent company further submitted that, after the alleged accident the complainant never approached respondent company and she has not submitted any claim form or documents that is police documents etc., to opponent company for payment of the policy amount and she has not issued any letter to opponent company therefore question of not settling of the claim of the complainant does not arise. Since complainant has failed to provide the necessary documents within stipulated period. Therefore that the above said complaint has been filed by the complainant for the relief of compensation against the respondent is not maintainable in the eye of law for the following reasons.
- The Tata AIG General Insurance Company Ltd., has never stated that they will not settle the claim of the complainant.
- There is no cause of action to file the complaint against the respondent. Therefore complaint filed by the complainant is not maintainable and same may be dismissed in limine.
- Further after death of the Owner/Insured of the complainant the complainant has not intimated to the Opponent Company.
13. Therefore this respondent company does not have any liability. Therefore there is no any deficiency in service on the part of the respondents. Therefore this respondent is not liable to pay any compensation. There is no any deficiency of service on the part of the respondent. Hence the present complaint file by the complainant is not maintainable in the eye of law. Hence the complaint deserves to be rejected. It is further stated by OP insurance company, the opponent TATA AIG General Insuance Co. Ltd., has issued 0189520180 policy to the Motor cycle bearing Reg. No.KA-17/HC-0115 and the said policy is in force from 08/11/2018 to 07/11/2023 and for one year only CPA has been covered for Rs.15,00,000/-, but the date of accident is on 20/04/2020 i.e., the policy does not cover towards PA claim for owner cum driver since not collected any premium towards PA claim of owner cum driver and also not given any indemnity towards the PA claim for owner cum driver and the said PA has been issued for Rs.15,00,000/- for the year 08/11/2018 to 07/11/2019 only, hence the above said complaint is not at all maintainable before this Hon’ble Court. Hence prays for dismissal of the complaint.
14. The complainant No.1 got herself examined as PW-1 and the documents were got marked as Ex.A-1 to Ex.A-7 and the opponent have examined as DW-1 and the documents were marked as Ex B-1 and closed the evidence on both side. Complainant and opponents have filed their written Arguments and heard the oral arguments.
15. Now, the points that arise for our consideration for
decision of above complaint are that:
- Whether the complainant proves that the opponents are negligent and there is deficiency in service?
- Whether the complainant is entitle for reliefs as sought in the complaint?
- What order?
16. Our finding on the above points are as follows:
- In the Negative
- In the Negative
- As per final order.
REASONS
17. Point No.1 & 2: We have gone through the pleading of complaint and documents submitted by the both parties. It is clear case of the complaint. She is claiming P.A. Coverage of Insurance by the OP of her deceased Son.
18. In this case complainants have submits that, the complainant No.1 is the mother and complainant No.2 is the father, complainant No.3 is the sister and complainant No.4 is the Brother. The complainant No.1 to 4 are legal heirs of deceased Santhosh he is the owner of the Motor cycle vehicle bearing Reg. No.
KA-17-HC-0115 and the said Santhosh purchased the said Motor cycle to develop his business. In the mean while on 20/04/2020 at about 7.45 am. the deceased Santhosh was travelling in the Motor cycle bearing Reg. KA-17-HC-0115 by riding himself from Hosadurga to Huliyaru and the said Santhosh was riding his motor cycle slowly, by adopting all traffic as well as driving rules in the left side of the road. While moving so in between S. Neralakere-Thotadamane village that too in front of Muniyappa’s garden land in Hosadurga - Srirampura Road at 7-45 AM., then a Lorry bearing Regn. No. TN-52-M-1699 was came in an opposite direction i.e., from Sriramapura side and the driver of the said lorry drove his vehicle in a rash and negligent manner with a heavy speed without adopting traffic as well as driving rules and he directly dashed to the Santhosh motor cycle rashly in the same speed and caused accident. And due to death of said accident, the said Santhosh sustained heavy head blood injuries. After the accident shifted to Govt. Hospital Hosadurga the Hospital Doctor has conducted P.M. examination. Thereafter, the complainants issued a legal notice to the opponent through their counsel on 25/08/2020. The opponent Insurance Company has not settled the claim nor repudiated the claim of the complainant, nor replied to the said notice. The complainants also submitted all the necessary paper i.e., Insurance Policy copy, R.C. copy entire policy records. Even that also, the Opponent insurance company has not settled any claim of the complainant for the benefit under personal accident. In the background of above said fact, we perused the documents of complainant that is F.I.R., Charge sheet, complaint Inquest Report, IMV report, spot Mahazar all these documents are got marked. F.I.R. and charge sheet and other documents reveals the truth that, above said accident caused injuries to the deceased person Santhosh. Due to this said accident deceased Santhosh was died due to accidental injuries. In this regard Hosadurga police have registered complaint in Crime No.0071/2020. The above said documents are public documents. In the case of death of Life Assured his legal heirs are entitled for receiving the P.A. coverage. The said deceased Santhosh has insured his vehicle bearing Reg. KA-17-HC-0115 with opponent company vide policy No.454391/31/2020/1194 for the period from 30/01/2020 to 30/01/2021 for premium of Rs.11,839/- In this policy OP company received Rs.750/- for personal accident cover Rs.15,00,000/-
19. The Insurance company has taken the contention that, after the alleged accident the complainant never approached to respondent company and she has not submitted any claim form or documents that is police documents etc., to Opponent Company for payment of the policy amount and she has not issued letter to Opponent Company. Therefore, question of not settling of the claim of the complainant does not arise. Since complainant has failed to provide the necessary documents within stipulated period. There is no dispute between the parties regarding the policy to vehicle bearing Reg. KA-17-HC0115 since as per Ex.B-1 police issued by the OP has been stand in the name of deceased Santhosh and all “B’’ labiality of policy issued by OP. The OP has collected Rs.750/- towards compulsory P.A. cover for owner cum driver for Rs.15,00,000/-
20. In the back ground of above said fact, we perused all the documents produced by both parties. The complainant side documents are got marked as Exhibits A-1 to 7 that is FIR, Spot Mahazar, Inquest report, I.M.V report, Charge sheet, P.M. Report and opponent has filed the Ex.B-1. These documents are substantiate facts of the case, that is complainant son avail the policy and accident took at the time driving the said vehicle and he died due to alleged accident finally policy was existing at the time of accident and P.A. coverage of Rs.15,00,000/-. OP contended that the opponent TATA AIG General Insuance Co. Ltd., has issued 0189520180 policy to the Motor cycle bearing Reg. No.KA-17/HC-0115 and the said policy is in force from 08/11/2018 to 07/11/2023 and for one year only CPA has been covered for Rs.15,00,000/-, but the date of accident is on 20/04/2020 i.e., the policy does not cover towards PA claim for owner cum driver since not collected any premium towards PA claim of owner cum driver and also not given any indemnity towards the PA claim for owner cum driver and the said PA has been issued for Rs.15,00,000/- for the year 08/11/2018 to 07/11/2019 only, In this regard the complainant has not submitted any documents to show that the accident insurance policy was in force at the time of the incident. The complainant as utterly failed to prove deficiency in service on the part of the OP and hence, we answer point No.1 & 2 in the negative.
24. Point No.3: Hence, in the light of above discussion we proceed to pass the following.
::ORDER::
The complaint filed by the complainant U/s 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 is hereby dismissed, with no order as to costs.
Communicate the order to both the parties.
(Typed directly on the computer to the dictation given to stenographer, the transcript corrected, revised and then pronounced by us on 09th June 2023.)
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
LADY MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
-:ANNEXURES:-
Witness examined on behalf of Complainant:
PW-1:- Smt. Dandemma, W/o Thimmappa @ Honnavar Thimmappa,
by way of affidavit of evidence.
Witness examined on behalf of opponents:
DW-1:- Sri Manjunath G S/o Govindaiah G, by way of affidavit
of evidence
Documents marked on behalf of Complainant:
01 | Ex-A-1:- | True copy of FIR |
02 | Ex-A-2:- | True copy of complaint dated 20/04/2020 |
03 | Ex-A-3:- | True copy of spot Panchaname |
04 | Ex-A-4:- | True copy of Motor vehicle accident report |
05 | Ex-A-5:- | True copy of Dead body investigate report submitted by Police |
06 | Ex-A-6:- | True copy of P.M. report |
07 | Ex-A-7:- | True copy of Charge sheet |
Documents marked on behalf of opponents:
01 | Ex-B-1:- | Copy of certificate of insurance and policy schedule form 51 CMV Rules. |
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
LADY MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
**GM
Consumer Court Lawyer
Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.
Bhanu Pratap
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)
Bhanu Pratap
Featured RecomendedHighly recommended!
Experties
Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes
Phone Number
7982270319
Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.