IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, PATHANAMTHITTA,
Dated this the 29th day of January, 2013.
Present : Sri. Jacob Stephen (President)
Sri. N. Premkumar (Member)
Smt. K.P. Padmasree (Member)
C.C.No.136/2012 (Filed on 08.08.2012)
Between:
Manju. P.R,
W/o. L.S. Ajoy,
Smitham House,
Vallamkulam East.P.O.,
Thiruvalla Taluk,
Pathanamthitta District.
(By Adv. Mini Lovejith) ….. Complainant
And:
The Branch Manager,
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.,
Divisional Office,
Marthoma Building,
T.K. Road, Thiruvalla.
(By Adv. P.D. Varghese) ….. Opposite party
O R D E R
Sri. N. Premkumar (Member):
Complainant filed this complaint against the opposite party for getting a relief from the Forum.
2. Fact of the case in brief is as follows: Complainant is the registered owner of the Stage Carriage Bus. The said vehicle has valid insurance policy from opposite party for the periods 27.06.2011 to 26.06.2012. The said vehicle was off the road from 01.01.2012 to 01.02.2012 and 01.03.2012 to 30.04.2012. The said three months the said vehicle was in “G Form”. The Motor Vehicle Department after enquiry found that vehicle was off the road in the said periods and tax exemption was granted for the said period.
3. The policy of the vehicle with the opposite party terminates on midnight of 26.06 2012. The vehicle was off the road with in the period of the valid insurance policy for three months.
4. So the complainant is legally entitled to the concession for the laid up period of the vehicle, complainant’s vehicle is off the road for the two consecutive months. So she is entitled to get 3 months extension of validity of the insurance policy with the opposite party for the vehicle from 26.06.2012. The income from the vehicle is the source of livelihood of the complainant.
5. Complainant and her husband personally appeared at the office of opposite party on 15.03.2012 and intimated that the said vehicle is in “G Form”. The details of garaging are also intimated. A photocopy of the policy certificate is given at the office of opposite party. After that complainant contact the opposite party several times through telephone and demanded for the extension of policy for 3 months on the ground of concession of off the road vehicle. At last on 15.05.2012 she sent a letter demanding extension of policy on concession. But they not given the valid legal benefit instead they sent a reply dated 23.05.2012 placing unsustainable grounds. Hence this complainant for directing the opposite party to give 3 months extension of policy coverage on concession to the vehicle policy or in the alternative to refund 3 months policy amount of ` 6,888 with interest, compensation and cost.
6. Opposite party entered appearance and filed version stating that complaint is not maintainable either in law or on facts. Opposite party admit that complainant is the registered owner of the stage carriage bus and insured with them for a period from 26.07.2011 to 26.06.2012. According to them, complainant served an application dated 15.05.2012 claiming concession for laid up insured vehicle. It is stated in the application that the bus was off the road from 01.01.2012 to 01.02.2012 (1 month) and from 01.03.2012 to 30.04.2012 (2 months). This opposite party rejected the application as the ‘All India Motor Tariff’ stipulates some conditions and accordingly the opposite party sent reply to the insured informing the inability to consider the request.
7. As per GR 31 of ‘All India Motor Tariff’ to consider concession of insured vehicle, which are laid up in garage and not in use for a period of not less than two consecutive months the following criteria need to be complied with.
(i) the vehicle is not undergoing repairs during lay-up period as a result of an event giving rise to a claim under the policy.
(ii) previous notice in writing has been given to the insurer by recorded delivery.
(iii) The certificate of insurance has been returned to the insurer, and
(iv) The period of lay-up/suspension of policy shall not extend beyond twelve months from the expiry date of the policy period in which the lay-up has commenced.
8. In this case, the 1st laid up period i.e. 01.01.2012 to 01.02.2012. The opposite party is not be able to consider the claim as the tariff prescribes minimum of 2 months laid up for becoming eligible for the concession. For the 2nd laid up period is 01.03.2012 to 30.04.2012 the insured have not complied with the issuance of previous notice in writing to the opposite party by recorded delivery and that the certificate of insurance has not been returned to the opposite party. Moreover it was mentioned in the complaint itself that the complainant had informed the opposite party about the lay-up only on 15.03.2012 and on 28.03.2012, over phone, i.e. after the commencement of lay-up. In fact the complainant had communicated the laid up of vehicle vide letter dated 15.05.2012 only. In every case the motor tariff does not provide for any refund of premium on account of lay-up instead in apt cases it will provide extension of policy period. The relevance of surrendering of original insurance policy is that the insurers are not at risk even for third party liability during the period of lay up. Instead the insurers collect a nominal premium to cover the vehicle against fire and theft. From the above reason there is no deficiency of service in their part and hence they canvassed for the dismissal of the complaint with their cost.
9. From the above pleadings, following points are raised for consideration:
(1) Whether the complaint is maintainable before the Forum?
(2) Whether the reliefs sought for in the complaint are allowable?
(3) Relief and Cost?
10. Evidence of the complaint consists of the oral deposition of PWs. 1 and 2, DW1 and marked Exts. A1 to A5 and Exts. B1 and B2. After closure of evidence, both sides were heard.
11. Point Nos. 1 to 3: In order to prove the complainant’s case, complainant filed proof affidavit along with certain documents. She was examined as PW1 and marked Exts. A1 to A5. Ext. A1 is the copy of R.C. book of the vehicle KL-3H/3341. Ext. A2 is the copy of policy certificate. Ext. A3 is the copy of letter sent by the complainant to opposite party dated 15.05.2012. Ext. A4 is the reply letter of opposite party dated 23.05.2012. Ext. A5 is the copy of report of the Regional Transport Officer.
12. In order to prove the contention of opposite party, the Divisional Manager of Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. filed proof affidavit along with certain documents. He was examined as DW1 and the documents produced were marked as Exts. B1 and B2. Ext. B1 is the policy copy with condition. Ext. B2 is the copy of GR-31 of India Motor Tariff.
13. On the basis of the contentions and arguments of the parties, we have perused the entire materials on record. Complainant’s case is that her insured stage carriage bus laid up for a period of three months during the tenure of the insurance policy. Though complainant claimed concession for the laid up period, opposite party rejected the same. Hence this complaint.
14. Opposite party’s contention is that as per GR-31 of All India Motor Tariff to consider concession of insured vehicle which are laid up in garage and not in use for a period of not less than two consecutive months. As per GR-31 criteria, previous notice in writing has been given to the insurer by recorded delivery and the certificate of insurance has been returned to the insurer. In this case, the first laid up period i.e. 01.01.2012 to 01.02.2012. The opposite party is not be able to consider the claim as the tariff prescribes minimum of 2 months laid up for becoming eligible for the concession. For the second laid up period is 01.03.2012 to 30.04.2012. The insured have not complied with the issuance of previous notice in writing to the opposite party by recorded delivery and that the certificate of insurance has not been returned to the opposite party. Moreover, complainant informed the opposite party about the lay up only on 15.03.2012 and 28.03.2012 over phone, i.e. after the commencement of lay up. Therefore, motor tariff would not provide for any refund of premium on account of lay up.
15. It is seen that there is no dispute regarding the validity of policy and laid up concession. As per GR-31, concession of insured vehicle, which are laid up in garage and not in use for a period of not less than 2 consecutive months. Evidence on record shows that the insured vehicle’s second laid up period is 01.03.2012 to 30.04.2012 i.e. 2 consecutive months. According to opposite party, complainant is entitled to get the concession on the said second laid up period, provided she has to comply GR-31 criteria i.e. (i) previous notice in writing has been given to the insurer by recorded delivery (ii) the certificate of insurance has been returned to the insurer.
16. It is pertinent to note that as per Ext. A3, the second laid up period is 01.03.2012 to 30.04.2012. The intimation date is recorded as 15.05.2012 which is after the commencement of lay up period. It is in contravention of GR-31 guidelines as stipulated in Ext. B2. Moreover, materials on record does not reveal that complainant either given previous notice in writing or to return the certificate of insurance to the insurer. Therefore, we are not inclined to interfere on Ext. A4, which is a lawful repudiation. Hence we find that there is no deficiency in service and thereby complaint is not allowable.
17. In the result, complaint is dismissed. No cost.
Declared in the Open Forum on this the 29th day of January, 2013.
(Sd/-)
N. Premkumar,
(Member)
Sri. Jacob Stephen (President) : (Sd/-)
Smt. K.P. Padmasree (Member) : (Sd/-)
Appendix:
Witness examined on the side of the complainant:
PW1 : P.R. Manju.
PW2 : L.S. Ajoy.
Exhibits marked on the side of the complainant:
A1 : Photocopy of R.C. book of the vehicle KL-3H/3341.
A2 : Photocopy of the policy certificate.
A3 : Photocopy of the letter sent by the complainant to
opposite party dated 15.05.2012.
A4 : Reply letter of opposite party dated 23.05.2012.
A5 : Photocopy of service verification report of the Regional
Transport Officer.
Witness examined on the side of the opposite party:
DW1 : K.K. Punnoose.
Exhibits marked on the side of the opposite party:
B1 : policy copy with policy conditions.
B2 : copy of GR-31 of India Motor Tariff.
(By Order)
(Sd/-)
Senior Superintendent
Copy to:- (1) Manju. P.R, Smitham House, Vallamkulam East.P.O.,
Thiruvalla Taluk, Pathanamthitta District.
(2) The Branch Manager, Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.,
Divisional Office, Marthoma Building, T.K. Road,
Thiruvalla.
(3) The Stock File.
