SRI JIBAN KRUSHNA BEHERA, MEMBER (I/C)
The complainant has filed this complaint petition, U/s 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (here-in-after called as the “Act”) alleging a deficiency in service against the Ops.
2. The case of the complainant, in short, is that he is the owner of a four wheeler vehicle bearing registration No.OD-1V-5485. The complainant had insured his vehicle with the Ops-Insurance Company bearing policy No.OG211901180200088242 through online transaction ID No.VF2202171345100898014270 on 17.2.2022 on payment of Rs.2,445/- and the validity of which was covered from 19.2.2022 to 18.2.2023. After issuing the above policy certificate, the Ops-insurance company intimated the complainant to collect the policy certificate from the office website, but the Ops have not yet provided the hard copy of the said policy. It is further stated that when the complainant tried to search the above policy certificate through online, it came to light that said policy in question has been issued in the name of an another person. Thus, the complainant immediately informed the matter to the Ops and the Ops have assured to issue another correct policy certificate very soon. Thereafter, the complainant informed the Ops time and again for providing of his policy certificate, but the Ops rendered no help to him. The complainant could not able to ply his vehicle for want of policy certificate. So, the complainant served a legal notice on the Ops on 31.3.2022 which was received by them, but they remained silent over the matter. For such type of inaction, the complainant not only sustained financial loss but also suffered mental agony. From the above, it is clearly made out that the Ops have played unfair trade practice in order to grab the money of the complainant. The Ops have not provided proper service even after receipt of the money for the purpose and thereby they are deficient in rendering their service towards the complainant. Therefore, the complainant was constrained to file the present case.
The cause of action arose for filing of the case on 17.2.2022, when the complainant paid the money towards policy certificate and on 31.3.2022, when the complainant served legal notice against the Ops. Hence, this case.
To substantiate his case, the complainant has relied upon the following documents, which are placed in the record-
- Photocopy of Online money transaction.
- Photocopy of Online information regarding policy certificate number.
- Photocopy of Online policy details.
- Photocopy of e-mail sent by the complainant.
- Photocopy of e-mail sent by the complainant.
- Photocopy of legal notice issued against the Ops.
- Photocopy of Registration receipts with track consignments.
3. In the case at hand, the OP appeared and filed their joint written version challenging the maintainability of the case. They have denied the averments made in the complaint petition. In their written version, the Ops have stated, inter alia, that they have no knowledge about the insurance policy in respect of the vehicle of the complainant through online service and payment of Rs.2,445/- for the purpose on 17.2.2022 and the Ops have intimated the complainant to collect policy certificate in question from office website and the Ops have assured the complainant for issuance of another policy certificate. It is specifically stated by the Ops that the policy certificate bearing No.OG-21-1901-1802-00088242 is issued by their Insurance Company in the name of Mr. Sannappa with respect of his two wheeler bearing Regd. No.KA-12Q-1525 which was valid from 13.12.2020 to 12.12.2021 and their Company has not at all issued the above policy certificate in favour of the complainant. Therefore, the Ops are no way liable and responsible for deficiency of service and unfair trade practice as alleged by the complainant. Lastly, it is prayed that the complaint is liable to be dismissed with cost.
In order to substantiate its case, the Ops haverelied upon the following documents, which are placed in the record-
- Photocopy of disputed Policy certificate.
4. In view of the above averments of the parties, the points for determination in this case are as follows:-
(i) Whether the complainant is a Consumer?
(ii) Whether there is any cause of action to file this case?
(iii) Whether this Consumer case is maintainable as per Law?
(iv) Whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of the Ops?
(v) Whether the complainant is entitled to get the relief, as sought for?
F I N D I N G S
5. In order to arrive at a definite conclusion, first of all, it is required to be discussed as to whether the complainant is a bonafide consumer or not and whether the complainant has cause of action to file the case and lastly whether the case is maintainable or not.
6. In this regard, on perusal of Annexure-1, the photocopy of online transaction, it is found that the complainant had paid Rs.2,445/- through online in favour of the Ops-Insurance Company for one year third party on 17.2.2022 at 1.45 PM vide transaction ID No.VF2202171345100898014270 and the amount was debited from the account ******7293 vide UTR No.204891691819. Further, Annexure-2 shows that message was forwarded by the Ops-Company in the name of the complainant wherein transaction status was mentioned as successful. In the said message, policy number was mentioned as OG-21-1901-1802-00088242 issued in the name of the complainant along with a message such as – “Thank you for purchasing four wheeler insurance policy with Bajaj Allianz. We are enclosing the policy certificate document ….“ Annexure-3 is the Car Insurance Policy Details issued by the Ops-Insurance Company wherein Policy Certificate Number mentioned as OG-21-1901-1802-00088242, date of issue shows as 17 Feb 2022, Plan Details- Third Party-1 year Third Party Only, Third Party Validity-19 Feb 2022 – 18 Feb 2023. Annexure-4 is the e-mail forwarded by the complainant to the Ops from the cell phone of his son on 21.2.2022 at 9.20 AM on the subject captioned “kindly send correct insurance certificate”. Annexure-5is the another e-mail forwarded by the complainant to the Ops on 3.3.2022 at 7.01 AM stating for issue settle the third party insurance policy. From the above documents proved on behalf of the complainant, it is crystal clear that the complainant had purchased one third party motor policy in respect of his vehicle in question on payment of Rs.2,445/- through online vide transaction ID No.VF2202171345100898014270 and the amount was debited from his account vide UTR No.204891691819 and the said transaction was successful. In return, the Ops-Company forwarded message to the effect that they had issued policy No.OG-21-1901-1802-00088242 in the name of the complainant. The said policy was a third party policy valid for one year i.e. from 19.2.2022 to 18.2.2023. As the policy certificate was not available in the official website of the Ops, the complainant sent e-mails to them, but the Ops could not able to provide the insurance policy certificate to him as yet. Being frustrated, the complainant was sent legal notice against the Ops. Still then they are silent over the matter. From the above discussions, it is held that the complainant is a bonafide consumer, he has cause of action to file the present case and the case is maintainable.
7. Coming to next the point, as to whether the Ops are deficient in their services or not. In the above premises, on perusal of the written version submitted on behalf of the Ops, it is seen that they have only taken the stand that on verification of the insurance policy bearing No.OG-21-1901-1802-00088242, it was found that the said policy was issued by their Company in the name of one Mr.Sannappa with respect of a motor cycle bearing Regd. No.KA-12Q-1525 valid from 13.12.2020 to 12.12.2021 and they have not issued the said insurance certificate in favour of the complainant. On perusal of Annexure-A, it is seen that the policy in question was issued in favour of Mr Sannappa, S/o Ninge Gowda, who was an inhabitant in the State of Karnataka and valid from 13.12.2020 to 12.12.2021. In this context, when the Ops have admitted that the policy certificate in question stands in the name of a person of Karnataka State, then how they forwarded online message issuing the said policy certificate number with policy details in favour of the complainant. The Ops have not taken their stand that the online messages as submitted on behalf of the complainant are all fake and those are not issued by their Company at any time. For the sake of argument, it is to be believed that the insurance policy in question was not issued by the Ops in favour of the complainant, rather, it was issued in favour of a person of Karnataka State, then what prevented them from issuing insurance policy certificate till today since 17.2.2022, the date of receipt of the money from the complainant through online. In this regard, the Ops have not whispered a sing word. They showed their total denial about the transaction so also issuance of insurance policy number in favour of the complainant. At the same time, on perusal of Annexure-1 to 5, it cannot be said that the Ops-Company had not received the premium from the complainant through online and had not issued message with regard to receipt of the amount for the insurance policy& insurance policy number, its nature with its validity period. Therefore, the stand taken by the Ops-Company, as stated above, is not at all believable.
8. Besides the above, Annexure-6, the legal notice, speaks itself that the complainant had issued the same on 31.2.2022 against the Ops through Registered Post and the Ops have received the legal notice, as it appears from the Annexure-7. In this connection, a legal notice for deficiency in service can be sent by a consumer to the service provider or Company who has provided poor quality of service and sending deficiency in service legal notice is the most primary step where the service provider gets an opportunity to compensate the consumer. The very fact in the present case is that the Ops remained silent to the legal notice of the complainant which itself indicates that the Ops are guilty of providing insurance policy and consequent deficiency in service by their negligent attitude in attending to the complainant on the matter which is brought to its notice.
9. From the above discussions, it is held that the stand taken by the Ops is a concocted one and has no relevancy with the documentary evidence adduced on behalf of the complainant. Further, the Ops have received the money forwarded by the complainant through online on 17.2.2022 and on the same day the Ops have issued the policy certificate number, plan details, nature of plan and its validity period, also through online. Admittedly, the Ops have not yet issued the insurance policy certificate in favour of the complainant. It is also an admitted fact that the Ops have issued the insurance policy number, date of issue, plan details, nature of plan and its validity. But the plea of total denial, as taken by the Ops at the time of hearing, otherwise proved itself that they are guilty for unfair trade practice and for not issuing the insurance policy certificate since 17.2.2022 till the date when the present case is filed even after receipt of the premium for the purpose, a clear case of deficiency in service is made out against the Ops.Therefore, both the Ops are jointly and severally liable for the compensation.
Hence, it is ordered –
O R D E R
The case of the complainant be and the same is allowed on contest against the Ops. The Ops are hereby directed to issue the Insurance Policy Certificate in respect of the vehicle of the complainant within a period of seven days from the date of receipt of this order. Further, the Ops are directed to pay compensation of Rs.50,000/- for suffering of mental agony, financial loss and litigation cost. In the event of failure by the Ops to provide Insurance Certificate in respect of the vehicle in question of the complainant within the stipulated period, they shall refund Rs.2,445/- with interest @ 12% p.a. from 17.2.2022 till its realization along with the compensation amount so awarded to the complainant within 45 days from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, failing which the complainant is at liberty to realize the same through the process of law.
Pronounced in the open Court of this Commission this the 10thday of September, 2024 under my hand & seal of the Commission.
