Kerala

StateCommission

A/08/77

Salim - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Divisional Manager - Opp.Party(s)

Dinesh Sajan

24 Oct 2008

ORDER


.
CDRC, Sisuvihar Lane, Sasthamangalam.P.O, Trivandrum-10
Appeal(A) No. A/08/77

Salim
...........Appellant(s)

Vs.

The Manager
The Divisional Manager
...........Respondent(s)


BEFORE:
1. JUSTICE SHRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU 2. SMT.VALSALA SARNGADHARAN 3. SRI.M.K.ABDULLA SONA

Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):
1. Salim

OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
1. The Manager 2. The Divisional Manager

For the Appellant :
1. Dinesh Sajan

For the Respondent :
1. 2.



ORDER

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.

 

 
KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
 VAZHUTHACAUD THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
                                                                                                        
                                                                         FA.77/08
                                      JUDGMENT DATED.23.10.08
PRESENT
JUSTICE SHRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU           -- PRESIDENT
SMT.VALSALA SARNGADHARAN                -- MEMBER
 
Salim,
99, Happy cottage,                                                       -- APPELLANT
Asramon,Kollam.
   (By Adv.Dinesh Sajan)
 
              Vs.
1. The Divisional Manager,
    M/s National insurance
    Hospital Road, Kollam.
2. The Manager,                                                     -- RESPONDENTS
    M/s National Insurance Co.Ltd.,
    Parameswaran Pillai,
   Hospital Road, Kollam.
                                                JUDGMENT
 
JUSTICE SHRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU,PRESIDENT
 
            The appellant is the complainant in OP.526/04 in the file of CDRF, Kollam. The Forum   dismissed the complaint.
The case of the complainant in short is that he is the registered owner of the impugned Ford Ikon car having a policy with the opposite parties. While the car was parked on the roadside on 11.5.03, another vehicle hit it on its left side. The vehicle sustained extensive damages.    The offending vehicle was not detected.    The matter was intimated at the traffic police station, Kollam. The complainant has spent Rs.45020/- for repairing the vehicle. The ownership was in the name of the son of the complainant. When the policy was availed the ownership was transferred in the name of the complainant on 6.3.03. The change of ownership was effected in the policy on 26.5.03 only. The opposite party repudiated the claim on the ground that the change of ownership was intimated to the opposite party only subsequent to the accident. 
According to the opposite party, there is no privity of contract between them and the complainant and that   section 157 (2) of the M.V. Act that stipulates that the change of ownership is to be effected in the insurance policy within 14 days from the date of transfer of ownership has not been complied with. 
Evidence adduced consisted of testimony of PW1 and Exts.P1 to P10.
We find that the Forum has relied on section 157 (2) of the M.V.Act held that the opposite parties are not bound in the context.
The Forum has relied on the decision reported in Vol. III (2007) CPJ 411 (United India Insurance Company LTD Vs. Harinder Kaur ) to reject the complaint.
We find that the above said decision is with respect to the death claim of the transferee of the vehicle instituted by his LRs. The policy was not transferred in the name of the transferee of the vehicle before his death. In the above contest, the National Commission reversed the orders of the State Commission that directed to pay the assured sum.
In Sri.Narayan Singh Vs. New India Assurance Company Ltd. IV (2007) CPJ 289 (NC) the National Commission has positively held that the benefits under the policy automatically accrue to the new owner on transfer of vehicle. The National Commission has also pointed out that the circular of the tariff Advisory Committee of the GIC itself is to the above effect.   The decision of the Supreme Court in this regard in Complete Insulations (P) Ltd. Vs. New India Assurance Company mentioned in the decision of the Chhattisgarh State Commission in Ajimuddin Vs. The New India Assurance Company Ltd. III (2006) CPJ 273 was also relied on. In the circumstances, we find that the order of the Forum rejecting the complaint on the above point without considering the quantum of compensation is liable to be set aside and we do so.
It is seen that the surveyor has assessed the quantum of compensation as Rs.24647/- less salvage value of Rs.750/- although the complainant has claimed the amount of Rs.45020/-. The counsel for the complainant has submitted that he will confine the claim to the amount suggested by the surveyor.
In the circumstances, the opposite party is directed to pay a sum of Rs.23897/- ie. the amount less salvage value to the complainant/appellant with interest at 12% from the date of filing. The complainant is also entitled for cost of Rs.5000/-. The amounts are to be paid within 3 months from the date of this order, failing which the respondent will be pay interest at 18% from today. The appeal is disposed of accordingly.  
 
 
JUSTICE K.R.UDAYABHANU          -- PRESIDENT
 
 
 
                    VALSALA SARNGADHARAN          -- MEMBER
 
S/L
           



......................JUSTICE SHRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU
......................SMT.VALSALA SARNGADHARAN
......................SRI.M.K.ABDULLA SONA