Complaint is filed on 3-2-2009
Compliant disposed on 1-7-2010
BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM ::AT:: KARIMNAGAR
PRESENT: HON’BLE SRI K. DEVI PRASAD, B.Sc., LL.B., PRESIDENT
HON’BLE SMT. E. LAXMI, M.A.LL.M.,PGDCA (Consumer Awareness), MEMBER
HON’BLE SRI. K. CHANDRA MOHAN RAO, B.Com., LL.B., MEMBER
THURSDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF JULY, TWO THOUSAND TEN
CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO. 19 OF 2009
Between:
Kacham Srinivas, S/o. Mallesham, Age 46 years, Occ: Business, R/o. Manakondur, village & mandal, district Karimnagar.
… Complainant
AND
Reliance General Insurance Company Limited, R/by it’s Branch Manager, Servicing Branch Office, 3rd Floor, Kyaas Towers, Dr.Br. Ambedkar Road, Court Chowrasta, Karimnagar.
…Opposite Parties
This complaint is coming up before us for final hearing on 8-6-2010, in the presence of Sri T. Lakshmann Rao, Advocate for complainant, and Sri Ch. Venkateshwar Rao, Advocate for opposite party, and on perusing the material papers on record, and having stood over for consideration this day, the Forum passed the following:
:: ORDER::
1. This complaint is filed under Section 12 of C.P. Act, 1986 seeking direction to the opposite party to pay an amount of Rs.30,000/- towards the amount of claim and incidental expenses with interest and costs.
2. The brief averments of the complaint are that M/s. Vaishnavi Industries is the owner of the Eicher Goods Carriage Vehicle bearing no. AP 15X-1731. The opposite party issued insurance policy on 12.11.2007 indemnifying the liability arising out of the use of the vehicle and the said policy is in force till 11.11.2008. On 7.5.2008 the said vehicle met with an accident near Rajarampalli Village of Velgatoor Mandal in which the said vehicle was damaged to the tune of Rs.20,000/-. A criminal case was registered by Police Station, Velgatoor in Crime No.53 of 2008 under Sec 337, 429 and 427 of IPC. Subsequently the complainant got the vehicle repaired by spending Rs.20,000/- and the vehicle is kept idle for a period of 15 days due to which the complainant sustained loss of Rs.10,000/-. The complainant submitted a claim to the opposite party for payment of Rs.20,000/- for reimbursement of the amount spent by him for repairs as the damages are indemnified by the opposite party by virtue of Insurance policy. Since the opposite party failed to settle the claim, the complainant got issued a Legal Notice on 18.9.2008 demanding the opposite party to settle the claim. Inspite of service of notice the opposite party failed to pay the amount. Therefore, the complainant sought direction for payment of Rs.30,000/- with interest and costs.
3. The opposite party filed counter admitting that they issued Insurance Policy in respect of the Eicher Motor Vehicle NO.AP 15X-1731 in favour of M/s.Vaishnavi Industries, Manakondur. The opposite party denied the claim of the complainant the vehicle was damaged to the tune of Rs.20,000/- and that the complainant is entitled to recover the loss of Rs.10,000/- for keeping the vehicle. It is submitted that on receipt of claim from the complainant about the accident occurred on 7.5.2008 the opposite party appointed Sri B.Mohan lincensed Surveyor to assess the damages caused to the vehicle. After inspection he is submitted report Dt: 25.5.2008 assessing the damages at Rs.5,592-15 paise and basing on it the claim is settled and a cheque for Rs.5,500/- bearing no.686990 Dt: 23.6.2008 drawn on HDFC Bank is issued in favour of M/s.Vaishnavi Industries. It is further submitted that the complainant is not entitled to claim Rs.20,000/- towards damages and Rs.10,000/- towards loss caused to him as the vehicle is kept idle for repairs. As per the terms and conditions of the Insurance Policy the opposite party not liable to pay the loss caused for not using the vehicle. Since, the Insurance Company (O.P.) settled the claim by appointing a Surveyor within one month from the date of accident there is no delay or deficiency of service on their part. Hence, the opposite party prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
4. The complainant filed Proof Affidavit reiterating the averments made in the complaint and filed documents which are marked as Ex.A1 to A10. Ex.A1 is the Photostat copy of Registration Certificate of Eicher Motor Dt:, 16.11.2005. Ex.A2 is the Photostat copy of General Insurance Policy Dt: 12.11.2007. Ex.A3 is the Photostat copy GCV Comprehensive Package Policy Endorsement. Ex.A4 is the Photostat copy of FIR in Cr.No.53/2008 of PS Velgatoor Dt: 7.5.2008. Ex.A5 to A7 are the Photostat copy of Cash Bills for Rs.12,902/- issued by Manikanta Automobiles, Rs.1,450/- issued by Karimnagar Auto Guarage and Rs.5,700/- issued by Nagalaxmi Denting & Welding Works Dt: 22.5.2008. Ex.A8 is the office copy of Legal Notice issued by counsel for complainant addressed to opposite party Dt: 18.9.2008. Ex.A9 is the postal receipt no.2664. Ex.A10 is the Postal Acknowledgement Card addressed to opposite party.
5. The opposite party filed Proof Affidavit of it’s Senior Executive reiterating the averments made in the counter and filed documents which are marked as Ex.B1 to B3. Ex.B1 is the certified copy of Insurance Policy Dt: 12.11.2007. Ex.B2 is the Surveyor’s Report Dt: 25.5.2008. Ex.B3 is the Xerox copy of cheque representation slip Dt: 23.6.2008.
6. The points for consideration are:
- Whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of opposite party?
- If so, to what relief the complainant is entitled?
7. It is contended by the complainant that the opposite party failed to settle the claim made by him under Ex.A11 for payment of the amount of Rs.20,000/- spent by him to repair his vehicle. As per the terms and conditions of the policy under Ex.A2 and Ex.A3 the opposite party is bound to pay the said amount. The insured vehicle was damaged in an accident occurred on 7.5.2008 on which a case is registered under Ex.A4 FIR. It is contended that the bills under Ex.A5 to A7 issued by the workshop established the amount spent by the complainant. Inspite of service of Legal Notice under Ex.A8 the opposite party failed to settle the claim. Therefore, the complainant sought direction for payment of the amount.
8. It is contended by the opposite party that on receipt of claim under Ex.A11 a licensed Surveyor was appointed to assess the damages caused to the insured vehicle and he submitted report under Ex.B2 Dt: 25.5.2008 stating that the damages are caused to the tune of Rs.5,592-15 paise. Basing on the said report the claim is settled and a cheque for Rs.5,500/- is issued in favour of the complainant through a letter under Ex.B3. Since the opposite party acted promptly in settling the claim within 2 months of the accident there is no deficiency of service on their part. The complainant is not entitled for any damages during the period of repairs. Hence, prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
9. The admitted facts are that the opposite party issued Insurance Policy under Ex.A2 and Ex.A3 in respect of the Eicher Motor Vehicle owned by the complainant and under the said the policy the damages caused to the vehicle are indemnified. It is also not in dispute that the Insured vehicle was damaged in an accident which occurred on 7.5.2008 at Rajarampally village as it hit road side tree as a result of which the driver and cleaner sustained injuries. A case in crime no.53 of 2008 was registered by P.S.Velgatoor under Ex.A4. A perusal of the Claim Form under Ex.A10 discloses that the complainant submitted a claim to the opposite party informing about the damages caused to the vehicle and on receipt of the same the opposite party appointed a Surveyor to assess the damages who submitted report under Ex.B2 assessing the damages at Rs.5,592-15 paise and basing on his report a cheque is issued for Rs.5,500/-. But neither in the complaint nor in the counter, it is stated that the complainant received the said amount of Rs. 5,500/-.
10. A perusal of Surveyor Report under Ex.B2 the front portion of the vehicle was completely damaged. Though the Surveyor estimated the loss at Rs.23,666/- but he allowed the damages only to the tune of Rs.5,592-15 paise. He assessed the damages to the windshield glass at Rs.2,800/- against estimated rate of Rs.4,200/-. Infact when the glass is damaged the entire glass has to be replaced and it can’t be said that half-portion is useful. The Surveyor has not allowed some of the damages without giving any reasons for not considering the claim. Admittedly he has stated that the front portion of the vehicle is damaged. On the other hand the complainant submitted Cash Bill under Ex.A5 to A7 which reveals that he spent an amount of Rs.20,052/- to repair the damaged vehicle. Having issued the policy under Ex.A2 and A3 the opposite party is bound to abide by the terms and conditions of the policy and they can’t deduct the amount of Bill as per their own whims and fancies, but they are bound to pay the sum assured as per the bills submitted by the insured. However the Insurance Company is entitled to make deductions to the extent of Rs.30% on the amount shown in Bills under Ex.A5 to A7 as there will be depreciation to the parties of the vehicle due to Wear and Tear. The opposite party has not produced the terms and conditions of the policy in support of their case that the complainant is not entitled for payment of amount in respect of the particular parts of the vehicle. Inspite of service of Legal Notice under Ex.A8 the opposite party failed to pay the amount spent by the complainant. By filing the Bills under Ex.A5 to A7 the complainant proved the amount spent by him to repair the vehicle to a tune of Rs.20,052/-. Out of which the opposite party is entitled to reduce 30% towards depreciation. Thus the complainant is entitled to claim a sum of Rs.14,037/- towards the amount payable under the policy. Though the complainant claimed a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards incidental expenses for keeping the vehicle idle during the period of repairs, there is no such condition in the policy to pay such amount. Therefore the complainant is not entitled for the said amount.
11. It is contended by the opposite party that a cheque is issued for Rs.5,500/- on 23.6.2008 in favour of the complainant towards the settled amount. But there is no clarification whether the complainant received that amount. If it is already received it shall be deducted from the amount allowed in this case. For the foregoing reasons, we hold that the opposite party is liable to pay a sum of Rs.14,037/- towards the amount of claim payable under the Insurance Policy along with interest and costs.
12. In the result the complaint is partly allowed directing the opposite party to pay a sum of Rs.14,037/- towards the amount payable under the policy together with interest @ 9% P.A. from the date of filing the complaint i.e. 3.2.2009 and Rs.500/- towards costs of the complaint within one month from the date of receipt of this order. If the amount of Rs.5,500/- sent by the opposite party through cheque no.686990 Dt: 23.6.2008 is withdrawn by the complainant, he is entitled to receive the balance amount out of total amount, and if it not received the opposite party shall pay the total awarded amount of Rs.14,037/-.
Typed to my dictation by Stenographer, after correction the orders pronounced by us in the open court this the 1st day of July, 2010.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
NO ORAL EVIDENCE HAS BEEN ADDUCED ON EITHER SIDE
FOR COMPLAINANT:
Ex.A1 is the Photostat copy of Registration Certificate of Eicher Motor Dt:, 16.11.2005.
Ex.A2 is the Photostat copy of General Insurance Policy Dt: 12.11.2007.
Ex.A3 is the Photostat copy GCV Comprehensive Package Policy Endorsement.
Ex.A4 is the Photostat copy of FIR in Cr.No.53/2008 of PS Velgatoor Dt: 7.5.2008.
Ex.A5 to A7 are the Photostat copy of Cash Bills for Rs.12,902/- issued by Manikanta Automobiles, Rs.1,450/- issued by Karimnagar Auto Guarage and Rs.5,700/- issued by Nagalaxmi Denting & Welding Works Dt: 22.5.2008.
Ex.A8 is the office copy of Legal Notice issued by counsel for complainant addressed to opposite party Dt: 18.9.2008.
Ex.A9 is the postal receipt no.2664.
Ex.A10 is the Postal Acknowledgement Card addressed to opposite party.
FOR OPPOSITE PARTY:
Ex.B1 is the certified copy of Insurance Policy Dt: 12.11.2007.
Ex.B2 is the Surveyor’s Report Dt: 25.5.2008.
Ex.B3 is the Xerox copy of cheque representation slip Dt: 23.6.2008.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
