View 16053 Cases Against New India Assurance
Md. Sarbar filed a consumer case on 29 Oct 2015 against The Divisional Manager, New India Assurance Co. Ltd. in the Kendujhar Consumer Court. The case no is 13/2015 and the judgment uploaded on 02 Nov 2015.
IN THE COURT OF THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KENDUJHAR
CONSUMER COMPLAINT CASE NO. 13 OF 2015
Md. Sarbar,
S/o - Md. Akbar,
Village - Barkat Nagar, Ward No.8,
P.O/P.S - Barbil, Dist - Keonjhar…………………….Complainant
Vrs.
Divisional Manager,
New India Assurance Co. Ltd.
At/Post/P.S - Barbil, Dist- Keonjhar……………….Op. Party
PRESENT
Sri A.K. Purohit - President
Smt. B. Giri - Sr. Member
Sri S.C. Sahoo - Member
Advocate for the Complainant - Sri H.S. Mohanty & G.N. Jena
Advocate for the Op. Party - Sri A.K. Pattnaik & R.R. Rana
_______________________________________________________________________
Date of Hearing - 08.09.15 Date of Order - 29.10.15
_______________________________________________________________________
Smt. B. Giri, Sr. Member – The fact of the Case are that the complainant is the owner of the Bolero vehicle bearing Regd. No. OR 05 AH 0944 which was duly insured with O.P Insurance Company on the IDV amount of Rs.4,00,000/- (Four Lakhs) and the insurance was valid from 14.12.13 to 13.12.14 and the said vehicle was met with an accident on 30.06.14 under Barbil Police Station. As such the complainant lodged Station Diary Entry before the concerned Police Station on due date of occurance and intimated the same to O.P Insurance company who deputed Surveyor and as per Surveyor advice the vehicle was taken to garrage for repair and the complainant repaired the vehicle on payment of Rs.2,36,219.00 and lodged claim before the O.P Insurance company but from the date of lodging claim to till filing this complaint neither the O.P settle the claim nor repudiate the claim and hence this case praying for a direction to O.P Insurance company to pay the entire repair charges of Rs.2,36,219.00 along with compensation of Rupees 1,00,000/- and Rs.50,000/- for mental agony and in total Rs.3,86,219/-
In support filed:
The O.P after receipt of notice from this forum appeared through his engaged counsel who filed written statement denying the allegation made in the complaint petition stating that the case is not maintainable under law and facts and the case is bad for misjoinder of party and having no merit and admitted all other facts and further stated that after thorough verification of all connecting papers of the alleged vehicle it is ascertained that the vehicle in question was purchased from one Utkalini Nath and after purchase the ownership was changed but failed to produce permit as such finding no other way in absence of valid permit, this O.P repudiated the claim as “NO CLAIM” and communicated to the complainant on 02.12.14 and hence this O.P not liable for any deficiency of service and prayed to dismiss the case with costs.
In support filed:
Heard the learned Counsel for the parties at large and perused the material available on records and also gone through the written note of argument filed by O.P. There is no dispute that the vehicle of the complainant met with an accident during valid period of insurance and sustained heavy damages and the complainant incurred heavy expenditure to repair the said vehicle and it is also not in dispute that claim was lodged before the O.P Insurance company who deputed the loss assessor surveyor Sri Prasan Kumar Mishra to assess the exact loss of the vehicle and who assessed the loss to the tune of Rs.1,09,000/-. The foremost point come forward before us for our adjudication is that while the O.P claiming that the repudiation letter was sent to complainant on 14.07.14 the complainant refused the same and the ground for repudiation of claim is that due to non- submission of permit paper as it was in the name of Utkalini Nath instead of complainant.
On perusal of documents filed by both the parties it is seen that the vehicle stands in the name of the complainant and certificate of fitness was also recorded in the vehicle number and there is a permit effecting from 26.11.2009 to 25.11.2014 and insurance which was covered from the purchase date of vehicle as well as period. The advocate for the complainant argued that it is the duty of the O.P Insurance company to see that whether all the documents of the vehicle is genuine or not prior to get the vehicle insured or at the time of insurance and in the present case the O.P Insurance company verified all the documents and not raised any objection at the time of insurance of vehicle as such raising a plea that permit not stands in the name of the complainant cannot be taken to consideration and for the fault the O.P Insurance company complainant cannot be debarred from its genuine claim and as regard to repudiation of claim and intimation to complainant in this regard is also not proved as O.P failed to prove that this letter was served to complainant.
Under these facts and circumstances we hold that this is a fit case to allow the Complainant’s Petition with compensation and accordingly it is ordered.
ORDER
It is therefore ordered that O.P Insurance Company i.e. O.P No.1 is directed to pay the amount assessed by the loss assessor amounting to Rs.1,09,000/- to the complainant towards settlement of the claim amount with Rs.2,000/- cost and compensation within 30 days of receipt of this order. After the date the entire amount will carry 10% interest per annum till final payment.
The case is accordingly disposed of.
Order pronounced in the open court today i.e. on 29th day of October 2015 under my hand and seal.
I agree I agree
Sri S.C. Sahoo Mrs. B. Giri Sri A.K. Purohit
Member Sr. Member President
DCDRF, Kendujhar DCDRF, Kendujhar DCDRF, Kendujhar
Dictated & corrected by me
Mrs. B. Giri
Sr. Member,
DCDRF, Kendujhar
Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes
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.