District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum
Dakshin Dinajpur, W. Bengal
(Old Sub-Jail Municipal Market Complex, 2nd Floor, Balurghat Dakshin Dinajpur Pin - 733101)
Telefax: (03522)-270013
Present
Shri Sambhunath Chatterjee - President
Miss. Swapna Saha - Member
Shri Siddhartha Ganguli - Member
Consumer Complaint No. 10/2015
Sri Subhash Mahanta
S/o Narayan Chandra Mahanta
Vill.: Panditpur.
PO: Kamarpara, PS: Balurghat,
Dist. Dakshin Dinajpur ………………Complainant(s)
V-E-R-S-U-S
The Branch Manager,
National Insurance Co. Ltd.
Dunlop More,
P.O & P.S.: Balurghat,
Dist.: Dakshin Dinajpur. …………………Opposite Party
For complainant …………… - Mr. Humayun Kabir, Ld. Adv.
For OP …………… - Shri Nirmal Agarwal, Ld. Adv.
Date of Filing : 04.02.2015
Date of Disposal : 18.08.2015
Contd…P/2
Judgment & Order dt. 18.08.2015
It is the case of the complainant that he is a businessman and an owner of Bolero Plus vehicle being Registration No.WB 62-B/5999 and the registration of the vehicle is valid up to 26.12.2026. The complainant insured the vehicle with the Insurance Company being Policy No. 150703/31/13/6100010700 in the name of the complainant and the policy was valid up to 21.12.2014. The complainant paid expenses and charges for the insurance policy.
It is specific case of the complainant that on 21.2.2014 a road accident took place at about 6:00 am under Gangarampur police station and Gangarampur PS Case No.82/14 dt. 22.2.2014 u/s 304A/427 IPC was started. After accident the vehicle was sent for repairing to S.N. Motors (P) Ltd. Narayanpur, district Malda and the said vehicle was repaired and a bill of Rs.3,35,955/- was charged by the said S.N. Motors (P) Ltd. After repairing and receiving the bill from the said S.N. Motors (P) Ltd. the complainant submitted the bill to the OP as compensation amount and also he filed all relevant documents in support of compensation claim but unfortunately the National Insurance Company repudiated the claim of the complainant on the ground that the driving licence submitted to the OP by the complainant and it was not valid at the time of accident.
The complainant in the complaint stated that at the time of accident Sri Bibhash Mohanta brother of the complainant had a driving licence No. WB 59/14186, which was issued from the office of Regional Transport of District Uttar Dinajpur and the same was valid from 6.12.2001 up to 5.12.2013. After expiry of the validity period of the driving licence the driver Bibhash Mohanta surrendered his driving licence before the Regional Transport Authority of District Dakshin Dinajpur to issue a fresh driving licence and he deposited all the fees. After receipt of all the fees the Regional Transport Authority, Dakshin
Contd…P/3
Dinajpur issued him a temporary authorization of driving under rule 10 of the West Bengal Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989 and it was valid of this authorization the holder is exempted from the obligation to produce his licence so long as he is driving in accordance therewith. The said authorization was valid till 13.1.2014 and its validity period further extended up to 13.3.2014 and once again for two months i.e. up to 30 June, 2014. Regional Transport Authority, Dakshin Dinajpur issued a fresh driving licence being No. WB 61/20327 to Bibhash Mohanta w.e.f. date of issue i.e. 6.12.2001 the same will be valid up to 1.6.2017. At the time of accident driving licence no. WB 61/20327 was valid one and the driver had no need to produce licence.
Since, the accident occurred on 21.12.2013 and the driver had temporary authorization to drive the vehicle, he was not wanted to produce any driving licence to any authority. The complainant submitted all required documents but the OP did not ask for “temporary authorization certificate” of Regional Transport Authority to deny its liability. In view of the said fact after coming to know of the refusal of the insurance claim, the complainant sent a Lawyer’s letter to the OP and on failure to take any action by the OP Insurance Company the complainant had to file this case praying for cost of the repairing and also for other costs.
OP contested the case by filing a written version whereby the OP admitted that the complainant was a policyholder and the same was valid during the said accident. After the accident the company made survey of the accident vehicle through their surveyor and the surveyor assessed the damage of the vehicle to the tune of Rs.1,92,096/-.
The OP stated that in course of procedure for settling the own damage claim in favour of the insured OP asked the insured to
Contd…P/4
produce the driving licence of the driver and the complainant produced the driving licence which was invalid at the time of accident. The OP stated that Insurance Company had no knowledge about the said authorization to drive a vehicle. The complainant did not inform OP at any point of time the authorization letter when he was asked to produce the driving licence. It was negligence on the part of the complainant and in spite of being aware of the authorization letter he did not produce the same to the OP. Since, the said authorization to drive the vehicle was not produced and the OP was in dark about the said authorization letter to drive and accordingly the OP did not consider the claim made by the complainant and there was no willful deficiency in service to the insured/ complainant. The Insurance Company also incurred expenses of Rs.15,000/- towards the Advocate’s fees and no cost need to be imposed upon the OP.
On the basis of the pleadings of the respective parties following points are to be decided :-
- Whether the vehicle was insured with the Insurance Company?
- Where the vehicle met with an accident and due to such accident the vehicle was damaged?
- Whether the actual amount incurred by the complainant will be paid by the insurance company or the amount assessed by the Insurance Company?
- Whether the driver had the valid document at the time of said accident?
- Is the complainant entitled to get relief as prayed for?
DECISION WITH REASONS
All the points are taken together for the sake of brevity and avoidance of repetition of the same fact.
The complainant in the complaint stated that the vehicle was insured with the Insurance Company and the insurance policy remained valid while the said vehicle met with an accident. OP admitted the said
Contd…P/5
fact in the written version. It is the contention of the complainant for repairing of the vehicle a bill was submitted by S.N. Motors (P) Ltd. to the tune of Rs.3,35,955/- and the said bill was placed before the OP for realization of the bill amount from the OP. From the materials on record it is found that the OP denied the claim of the complainant since at the time of accident the complainant failed to produce any document to show that the driver of the vehicle had valid licence to drive the vehicle at the relevant point of time. The Ld. Lawyer for the complainant in order to prove that the driver had the valid document the complainant called for a record from RTA Office, Motor Vehicle Department, Dakshin Dinajpur at Balurghat with a request to bring the driving licence register in respect of driving licence No. WB 61/20327 and also a “temporary authorization letter” issued in respect of surrendered driving licence No. WB 59/14186 vide receipt No. SB-137154 dt. 02.12.2013. In response to the said Summons issued from this Forum the documents were produced by the concerned authority wherefrom it appears that Bibhash Mohanta driver of the said vehicle was allowed to drive the vehicle and the licence was issued from the Regional Transport Officer,Licencing Authority, Balurghat, Dakshin Dinajpur and driving licence remained valid w.e.f. 01.6.2001 to 01.6.2017 i.e. the said driver had the valid licence to drive the vehicle at the relevant point of time. Accordingly, we hold that the non-production of driving licence or non-production of ‘temporary authorization letter’ of driver by the complainant in response to the demand made by the OP to produce driving licence in support of the claim made by the complainant, the said fact was not unearthed by the complainant to the Insurance Company. Therefore, the claim made by the complainant was not accepted.
Since, the document filed by the complainant during the time of hearing of this case it proves the driver had the valid authority to drive
the vehicle at the relevant point of time i.e. when the accident took place, therefore the complainant will be entitled to get the compensation.
Contd…P/6
In order to compute the compensation the complainant has claimed the amount of bill submitted by S.N. Motors (P) Ltd. who claimed Rs.3,35,955/- for repairing of the said vehicle and subsequently after the said accident surveyor of the Insurance Company assessed the damage caused to the said vehicle found that the net assess loss sustained by the complainant to the tune of Rs.1,92,096/- and the assessor came to the conclusion after assessing the damage caused to the said vehicle and scientific manner the said assessment was made. The complainant, though, submitted a bill of Rs.3,35,955/- but there was no scientific conclusion rather proper assessment was not made for repairing of the said vehicle and as such we rely on the surveyor report who came to conclusion that the complainant sustained net assessed loss of Rs.1,92,096/- and the complainant will be entitled to get the said amount from the said OP.
From the materials on record it transpires that the complainant failed to produce the relevant documents that is driving licence of the driver to establish his claim but subsequently after the filing of the case the document has been produced by the complainant which corroborates the fact that the driver had the valid licence to drive the vehicle at the relevant point of time. Omission on the part of the complainant to substance his claim cannot be considered to be the deficiency in service on the part of OP.
From the facts and circumstances of all the points are disposed of accordingly. The complainant will be entitled to get compensation as assessed by the surveyor of the OP i.e. net assessed loss sustained by the complainant i.e. Rs. 1,92,096/-.
Hence, it is
O R D E R E D
that the instant petition of complaint CC No.10 of 2015 is disposed of on contest and the complainant will be entitled to get the
Contd…P/7
compensation to the tune of Rs. 1,92,096/- from the OP. The OP is directed to pay the amount within 60 days from this day, failing which the complainant will be entitled to get interest @ 8% p.a. till the realization of the amount. Let the copy of this order handed over to the Ld. Lawyer for the OP for compliance of this order.
Let a plain copy of this order be furnished to the parties forthwith free of cost.
Dictated & corrected
………Sd/-….…….
(Sambhunath Chatterjee)
President
We concur,
……Sd/-..…… ………Sd/-……..
(S. Saha) (S. Ganguli)
Member Member
- Date when free copy was issued ……………………
- Date of application for certified copy ……………………
- Date when copy was made ready ……………………
- Date of delivery ……………………
FREE COPY [Reg. 18(6)]
- Mode of dispatch ……………………
- Date of dispatch ……………………
-x-
