BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMERS FORUM: KURNOOL
Present: Sri. M.Krishna Reddy, M.Sc., M.Phil., Male Member, PRESIDENT (FAC)
And
Smt. S.Nazeerunnisa, B.A., B.L., Lady Member
Monday the 18th day of March, 2013
C.C.No.164/2011
Between:
Smt.Chakali Eramma, W/o Late Yellesh,
H.No.1/19, Gudikal Village - 518 360,Yemmiganur Mandal, Kurnool District.
…Complainant
-Vs-
The Branch Manager,Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Limited,
Shop No.10, 11, 12, 3rd Floor, Alankar Plaza, Park Road, Kurnool - 518 002.
...Opposite ParTy
This complaint is coming on this day for orders in the presence of Sri.M.Sivaji Rao, Advocate for complainant and Sri.A.V.Subramanyam, Advocate for opposite party and upon perusing the material papers on record, the Forum made the following.
ORDER
(As per Smt.S.Nazeerunnisa, Lady Member)
C.C. No.164/2011
1. This complaint is filed under section 11 and 12 of C. P. Act, 1986 praying:-
- To direct the opposite party to pay the assured amount of Rs.2,00,000/- with accident benefits and with interest at the rate of 24% from the date of death;
- To pay a sum of Rs.25,000/- towards the compensation for causing mental agony and hardship;
- To pay the cost of this complaint;
- To pass any other order or orders that are deem to the fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.
2. The case of the complainant in brief is as under:- The complainant is the wife of the deceased driver Late.Chakali Yellesh, who died in a road accident and he was working as a driver of the tractor cum trailer bearing Nos.AP21 M 1864, AP21 X 4573. The said tractor was insured by the owner Mr.Rama Krishna Reddy with the opposite party. The opposite party issued policy bearing No.OG/10/1806/1811/00002155, which is valid from 11-01-2010 to 10-01-2011, which covers Personal Accident Claim for its Owner – Driver for an assured amount of Rs.2,00,000/-. On 25-06-2010 at 9.30 hours, the said vehicle met with an accident its resulted the bleeding injuries to the driver and was admitted Government Hospital Yemmiganur for better treatment during the treatment the said driver was died on 25-06-2010 at 17.45 hours. The Yemmiganur Police Registered a case in Crime No.64/2010. The complainant submitted claim to opposite party. As the opposite party did not settle the claim of the complainant, she got issued legal notice dated 07-07-2011 to opposite party by demanding to pay assured amount. The opposite party replied stating that they have not received any intimation about the accident. The complainant sent a letter dated 01-09-2011 to opposite party by narrating the incident. Despite that letter also, the opposite party did not settle the claim of the complainant. It amounts to deficiency of service on the part of opposite party. Hence the complaint.
3. Opposite party filed written version stating that the complaint is not maintainable. It is stated that the complainant is not a consumer. There was no contract between insurance company and the complainant or deceased. It is admitted that the opposite party issued policy bearing No.OG/10/1806/1811/0002155 for period from 11-01-2010 to 10-01-2011 to the tractor Nos.AP21 M 1864, AP21 X 4673 in favour of Mr.Y.Rama Krishna Reddy. It covers Personal Accidental risk to the owner – cum – driver. As per the terms and conditions of the policy it covers only to the Driver – Owner (i.e.,) Owner himself has to drive the vehicle by holding valid and effective driving license at the time of accident. It does not cover any risk to the said driver. The opposite party received the legal notice of the complainant and replied the same on 12-07-2011. There is no deficiency of service on the part of opposite party. The complaint is liable to be dismissed.
4. On behalf of the complainant Ex.A1 to A10 are marked and sworn affidavit of the complainant is filed. On behalf of the opposite party Ex.B1 and Ex.B2 are marked and sworn affidavit of the opposite party is filed.
5. Complainant and opposite party are filed their written arguments.
6. Now the points that arise for consideration are:
- Whether there is deficiency of service on the part of opposite party?
- Whether the complainant is entitled for the reliefs as prayed for?
- To what relief?
7. POINTS i and ii:- Admittedly the opposite party issued policy bearing No.OG/10/1806/1811/00002155 for the period of 11-01-2010 to 10-01-2011 to the tractor bearing No.AP21 M 1864 in favour of Mr.Y.Rama Krishna Reddy. It covers Personal Accidental risk to the owner – cum – driver. Ex.A1 is photo copy of Registration Certificate dated 06-09-2006 standing in the name of Mr.Y.Rama Krishna Reddy as owner and driver of the vehicle. Ex.A2 = Ex.B1 photo copy of policy. It is the case of the complainant that the deceased Late.Chakali Yellesh was working as a driver of the said insured vehicle on 25-06-2010. The vehicle met with an accident it resulted the injuries to the driver. During the course of treatment he died in Government General Hospital, Kurnool. The Police Registered a Case in Crime No.64/2010 which is marked as Ex.A3. Ex.A4 is the photo copy of Inquest Report and Ex.A5 is the photo copy of Post Mortem Examination issued by Assistant Professor, Department of Forensic Medicine, Kurnool dated 26-06-2010. Ex.A9 is the photo copy of Accident Report dated 30-06-2010 issued by Motor Vehicle Inspector. The complainant submitted the claim to opposite party. The opposite party did not settle the claim. She got issued legal notice under Ex.A6 dated 07-07-2011. The opposite party replied the same on 12-07-2011 it is marked as Ex.B2 = Ex.A7 stating that the opposite party was not intimated about the accident, then the complainant again sent a letter dated 01-09-2011 to opposite party which is marked as Ex.A8. But the opposite party did not respond. The learned counsel appearing for the complainant contended that the policy covers the risk of owner – cum – driver. The deceased was employed as driver to the insured vehicle. So the complainant is entitled for the assured amount under the above policy.
8. It is the case of the opposite party that there is no contract either with the complainant or deceased. The said policy covers the risk of owner – driver (i.e.,) the owner himself has to drive the vehicle by holding the valid and effective driving license at the time of accident. The opposite party is not aware about the employment of deceased – complainant’s husband as a driver to the insured vehicle under the above policy. The learned counsel appearing for the opposite party argued that as per the terms and conditions of the policy under section IV under Personal Accident Covers for owner – driver the said coverage is subject to (a) The owner driver is the registered owner of the vehicle insured. (b) The owner – driver is the insured named in this policy. (c) The owner – driver holds an effective driving license, in accordance with the provisions of Rule 3 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989, at the time of the accident. There is no coverage of insurance to risk of deceased driver under the policy this opposite party is not at all liable to pay any claim to the complainant.
9. As seen from Ex.B1 it is mentioned under head of section IV under Personal Accident Cover for Owner – Driver it is clear that the expression owner – driver means that both capacities should be in one person and the ownership and driving license shall be to a person alone entitled for compensation in terms of the policy. The said driver name is not mentioned in the above policy. In Ex.A1 Registration Certificate the name of registered owner and driver to the insured vehicle is mentioned as Mr.Y.Rama Krishna Reddy. Taking into consideration all the material on record we are of the view that the complainant is not entitled for any compensation under the above policy. There is no deficiency of service on the part of opposite party.
10. In the result, the complaint is dismissed without costs.
Dictated to the stenographer, transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced by us in the open bench on this the 18th day of March, 2013.
Sd/- Sd/-
LADY MEMBER PRESIDENT (FAC)
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
Witnesses Examined
For the complainant : Nil For the opposite party : Nill
List of exhibits marked for the complainant:-
Ex.A1 Photo copy of Registration Certification dated 06-09-2006.
Ex.A2 Photo copy of Certificate cum Policy bearing
No.OG/10/1806/1811/00002155.
Ex.A3 Photo copy of F.I.R. in Crime No.64/2010 of Yemmiganur
P.S. Kurnool District dated 26-06-2010.
Ex.A4 Photo copy of Inquest Report dated 26-06-2010.
Ex.A5 Photo copy of Report of Post Mortem Examination
No.765/2010 dated 26-06-2010.
Ex.A6 Office copy of Legal Notice dated 07-07-2011 along with
Postal Acknowledgement.
Ex.A7 Reply Letter issued by opposite party to complainant
dated 12-07-2011.
Ex.A8 Office copy of Letter dated 01-09-2011 of complainant to
opposite party along with Postal Acknowledgement
Ex.A9 Photo copy of Accident Report from Motor Vehicles
Inspector dated 30-06-2010.
Ex.A10 Photo copy of Requesting Letter dated 20-07-2010.
List of exhibits marked for the opposite party:-
Ex.B1 Photo copy of Certificate cum Policy bearing
No.OG-10-1806-1811-00002155 along with terms and
conditions.
Ex.B2 Reply Letter issued by opposite party to complainant
dated 12-07-2011 along with Postal Receipt and
Acknowledgement.
Sd/- Sd/-
LADY MEMBER PRESIDENT (FAC)
// Certified free copy communicated under Rule 4 (10) of the
A.P.S.C.D.R.C. Rules, 1987//
Copy to:-
Complainant and Opposite parties :
Copy was made ready on :
Copy was dispatched on :
