Andhra Pradesh

Nellore

CC/29/2013

Yalla Ravathi - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Branch Manager, National Insurance Company Limted - Opp.Party(s)

G.V.Ramesh

20 Apr 2015

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
NELLORE
 
Complaint Case No. CC/29/2013
 
1. Yalla Ravathi
W/o Late Nanda Kumar Reddy,Hindu widow Aged abour 30 years Presently Resident of H.No. GandhiNager,N.G.O. Colony, Buchireddypalem,Nellore district.
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. The Branch Manager, National Insurance Company Limted
16/1154 Opp. Sunday Market, Nellore. Opp Sunday Market, Nellore.
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.Krishna Murthy PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MR. M.Subbarayudu Naidu MEMBER
 
For the Complainant:G.V.Ramesh, Advocate
For the Opp. Party: T.Kumar, Advocate
ORDER

 

Date of Filing     :18-02-2013

                                                                                                Date of Disposal:20-04-2015

 

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM:NELLORE

Monday, this the 20th day of   April, 2015

 

          PRESENT: Sri P.V. Krishna Murthy, B.A., B.L., President

                             Sri M. Subbarayudu Naidu, Member.

 

C.C.No. 29/2013

Yella Revathi,

W/o.Late Nanda Kumar Reddy,

Hindu, Widow, Aged about 30 years,

Presently resident of Gandhi Nagar,

N.G.O.Colony, Buchireddypalem,

Nellore District.                                                                                          ..… Complainant 

 

                                                                           Vs.

 

The Branch Manager,

National Insurance Company Limited,

16/1154, Opposite to Sunday Market,

Nellore .                                                                                               …..Opposite Party

                                                        .        

            This complaint coming on 13-04-2015  before us for hearing in the presence of                Sri G.V. Ramesh, advocate for the complainant and Sri T.Kumar,  advocate for the opposite party  and having stood over for consideration till this day and this Forum made the following:

 

ORDER

(ORDER BY  Sri P.V. KRISHNA MURTHY, PRESIDENT)

 

                  The brief averments of the  complaint are as follows:

 

            The husband of the complainant was having two motor cycles AP 26 AA 1263 (Hero Honda)  and AP 26 AF 9232 (Sujuki).  The vehicles  were  insured with the opposite party for the period 31-05-2011  to 30-05-2012.  The husband of the complainant met with an accident near Pandluru Cross Road on 28-01-2012, while driving the vehicle AP-26-AF 9232.  A criminal case was filed with regard to the above accident.  The complainant filed the claim with documents.  The claim was repudiated.  The same amounts to a deficiency of service.  Hence, the complaint for payment of personal accident amount with interest, costs and compensation.

 

            2.         The brief averments of the  counter of the opposite party are as follows:

 

            The complaint is not maintainable.  The allegations made in the complaint are not correct.  The complainant is not a  consumer.  The Herohonda  vehicle of the husband  of the complainant was insured with the opposite party   during 31-05-2011 to 30-05-2012.  The Sujuki motor cycle (AP 26 AF 9232)  was not insured with the opposite party.  The opposite party is not aware of the death of the husband of the complainant  in an alleged motor accident.  Hence, the opposite party is not liable to the claim.  The other  allegations of the complainant are denied. The repudiation was valid.  There is no deficiency of service.  Hence, the complaint may be dismissed.

            3.         Now the point for consideration is “whether the opposite party committed a deficiency of service?”

            4.         The complainant filed her affidavit and marked Exs.A1 to A8.  On behalf of the opposite party, the administrative officer filed his affidavit and marked Ex.B1.

            5.         POINT:   The complainant is the wife of the deceased.  The complainant averred that the deceased  was having two motor  cycles,  both insured  with the opposite party, that the policy covers personal accident also, that the deceased met with a motor accident while driving vehicle bearing No.AP 26 AF 9232  and that  he  died in the said motor accident.  It was also averred that she applied for payment of personal accident claim of Rs.1,00,000/- and that the claim was repudiated by the opposite party.  This is the deficiency of service leading to the consumer dispute involved in this case.  The opposite party denied the   coverage of insurance of the vehicle AP 26 AF 9232, by it.  In the light of the above denial, the complainant has to establish the insurance coverage of the vehicle   by the opposite party.

            6.         Ex.A1 is an insurance policy for the  vehicle AP 26 AA 1268.  Ex.A2 is the death certificate.  Exs.A3, A4, A5 and  A6 are  the copies of post mortem examination, inquest, F.I.R and charge sheet respectively.  All these documents  will not establish the coverage  of the insurance of the vehicle involved in the accident.  From Ex.A6, it shows that the vehicle driven by another person, dashed against the motor cycle in which the deceased  was  travelling.  Ex.B1 is a copy of  Ex.A1. 

            7.         The complainant has to establish that the vehicle on which the deceased was travelling was insured with the opposite party on the date of the accident, to succeed  in this case. The petitioner failed to establish the above  vital fact.  The liability of the opposite party arises only, when the vehicle  was covered by insurance, by it.  In the absence of insurance coverage, the liability of the opposite party to any claim whatsoever, does not arise. Therefore, the repudiation  of the claim  of the complainant was right, resulting   in no deficiency of service.  In the absence of a deficiency  of service,  the complainant is not entitled to the claim.  The repudiation was valid   and  legal.  No consumer dispute was involved in this case.  The point  is held against the complainant.

 

            8.         In the result, the complaint is dismissed, but without costs.

 

            Dictated to Stenographer, transcribed by her corrected  and pronounced by us in the open  Forum, this the  20th  day of  April, 2015.

 

               Sd/-                                                                                                    Sd/-

           MEMBER                                                                                       PRESIDENT

 

                                                APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

 

Witnesses Examined for the complainant

 

P.W.1  -

20-06-2014

Smt Yalla Revathi, W/o.Late Nanda Kumar Reddy, Nellore District (Chief Examination filed)

 

Witnesses Examined for the opposite party

 

R.W.1  -

20-06-2014

Smt B. Manmadha, S/o.B. Praveen, Working  as Administrative Officer, Nellore ( Affidavit filed)

 

 

                             EXHIBITS MARKED FOR THE COMPLAINANT

 

Ex.A1  -

-

Photocopy of certificate of insurasnce in policy number:550903/31/11/62000004345 in favour of complainant.

 

Ex.A2  -

10-02-2012

Photocopy of  Death Certificate in the name of Yalla Nandakumar Reddy.

 

Ex.A3  -

28-01-2012

Photocopy of Report of Post Mortem Examination.

 

Ex.A4  -

28-01-2012

Photocopy of Inquest Report.

 

Ex.A5  -

26-01-2012

Photocopy of First Information Report in  Naidupet Police Station.

 

Ex.A6  -

-

Photocopy of charge sheet in the Court of Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Sullurpet.

 

Ex.A7  -

07-02-2013

Photocopy of letter from complainant to the   opposite party alongwith postal acknowledgement and receipt.

 

Ex.A8  -

-

Photocopy  of driving licence.

 

 

                         EXHIBITS MARKED FOR THE OPPOSITE PARTY

 

Ex.B1  -

-

Duplicate Schedule in policy No.550903/31/11/ 6200000434 alongwith two wheeler package policy terms and conditions.

 

                                                                                                                                 Id/-

                                                                                                                         PRESIDENT

Copies to:

 

1.

Sri G.V. Ramesh, Advocate, Nellore.

 

2.

Sri T. Kumar, Advocate, 17-1-615, Chakali Street, Nellore.

 

Date when free copy was issued:

 

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.Krishna Murthy]
PRESIDENT
 
[HON'BLE MR. M.Subbarayudu Naidu]
MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly 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.