Orissa

Jharsuguda

CC/130/2017

Nasib Kumar Patel S/O- Kedarnath Patel - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Branch Manager, National Insurance Co.Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

M.K. Panday

06 Aug 2018

ORDER

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, JHARSUGUDA

 

CONSUMER COMPLAINT CASE NO.130 OF 2017

 

Nasib Kumar Patel ( 35 Years.),

S/O- Kedarnath Patel,

RO/PO: Panchpada,

PS/ Dist: Jharsuguda, Odisha………………………………………………Complainant.

     

                                           

Versus

 

The Branch Manager,

National Insurance Co.Ltd., Jharsuguda Branch Office,

At/PO: Kali Mandir Road,

PS/Dist: Jharsuguda, Odisha…………….…………...………....….……...Opp. Party.

 

Counsel for the Parties:-

For the Complainant                                 M.K.Pandey, Adv.& Associates.

For the Opp. Party                                   A.K.Misha, Adv. & Associates.

 

Date of Order: 06.08.2018

Present

1. Shri Sundar Lal Behera, President.

                                                                               2. Shri Santosh Kumar Ojha, Member.

 

Shri Sundar Lal Behera, President : -  Brief fact of the case is that the complainant is a registered owner  of a Bolero XL bearing Regd. No.OD 23-1306 was insured with the O.P Insurance Company for a period from dt.27.10.2015 to dt.26.10.2016 for Rs.4,06,429/- only.   The Insured vehicle met with an accident on dt.10.10.2016 causing severe damage to the vehicle both extensive including mechanical parts.  FIR to that effect was also lodged before Town Police Station, Sundargarh.  After accident of the vehicle the complainant preferred accident claim before the O.P Insurance Company who also submitted estimate from one KGN Motor Garage, Brajrajnagar and others towards costs of the parts and labour charges amounting to Rs.1,66,975/- only but unfortunately his claim get repudiated by the O.P, Insurance company vide its letter dated 03.05.2017 due to violation of limitation as to use of cluse i.e  non-holding of valid route permit on the date of accident of the vehicle as the route permit furnished by him was issued in the name of one Bharat Sahu and not in the name of the complainant.  Challenging the said repudiation, alleging deficiency in service on the part of O.P Insurance Company the complainant has initiated this complaint before this Forum who claims the repudiation to be unjustified and illegal and sought for a claim of Rs.1,60,000/- only towards repairing charges and for compensation.  The O.P Insurance company claiming repudiation to be legal and justified, admitting the issuance of the Policy including the accident with submission of claim of Rs.1,66,975/- only, and submit that as the complainant was not having any relied route permit in his name thereby has violated the limitation as to used cluse and the complainant is not entitled for payment ‘accident claim’ on the very ground.

 

            The O.P Insurance company has produce the Final Survey Report of its Surveyor who assessed the net loss sustained to the vehicle to the tune of Rs.63,500/- only deducting loss salvage and less policy excess.  The O.P insurance company prays for dismissal of the complaint claiming the repudiation to be justified.

             

We have gone through the complaint petition, written version, available copies of documents, i.e. documentary evidence including repudiation letter and Final Survey Report.  When issuance of policy and the accident caused to the vehicle are admitted by the O.P Insurance Company merely because of non-holding of route permit in the name of the complainant cannot be a valid ground for total repudiation of the claim of the complainant.  We have to examine whether the repudiation of the insurance claim by the O.P Insurance Company is justified under limitation as to the ‘use’ cluse provided in the policy cover ?  In our view, breach with respect to playing of the vehicle without route permit is only a breach in respect to provision of Motor Vehicle Act and it is not a breach of term and condition of Insurance Policy and the same is hold by the Honorable State Commission of Himachal Pradesh reported in 2012(3)CPR 170 .

 

As per our above stated observation, we are in a considered view that O.P Insurance Company has wrongly repudiate the claim of the complainant which amounts to deficiency in service in its part.

 

The complainant deserved for a payment of his claim. Further when the Final Surveyor and loss assessor Engineer, D.K.Das duly appointed by the O.P Insurance company has assessed the net loss caused to the accident vehicle to Rs.63,500/- only against the claim of the complainant of Rs.1,66,975/- only and in absence of any objection to the assessed amount, we think it is proper accept the said assessed amount and the complainant is entitled to get Rs.63,500/- towards his claim.

 

In this case accident of the vehicle took placed on dt.10.10.2016 and the Final Survey Report was submitted by the Surveyor within a short period but the assessed amount was not paid to the complainant with a reasonable period by rejecting the claim on unjustified ground, we held the O.P Insurance Company to be guilty of deficiency in service in respect to the complainant, we allowed the complaint.  The complainant is also entitled for compensation due to in ordinate delay caused by the O.P Insurance Company.

 

We direct the O.P Insurance company to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.63,500/-(Rupees sixty three thousand) only.  The O.P. Insurance company also shall pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- ( Rupees five thousand) only towards mental agony, harassment including litigation cost of the complaint.

             

                       All the above stated direction shall be complied by the O.P Insurance Company within 4 weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order, failing which the O.P shall be liable for interest @9% per annum on the aforesaid awarded amount till realization. 

 

Accordingly the case is disposed of.

Order pronounced in the open court today the 6^th day of August’ 2018. Copy of this order shall be made available to the parties free of charge. 

 

                                                                               I Agree.                                                                                           

                                         

                                                        S.K.Ojha, Member                        S. L. Behera, President  

             

Dictated and corrected by me

 

                                                                                         S. L. Behera, President