BEFORE THE DISTRICT FORUM: KURNOOL

Present: Sri. T.Sundara Ramaiah, B.Com B.L., President

And

Sri. M.Krishna Reddy, M.Sc., M.Phil., Male Member

And

         Smt. S.Nazeerunnisa, B.A., B.L., Lady Member

Monday the 14^th day of November, 2011

C.C.No.37/2011

Between:

C.H.Rambabu, S/o Chitharaju,

H.No.4-343-19, Telecom Nagar, Adoni, Kurnool District - 518 301.                            …Complainant

                                           -Vs-

1. The General Manager, Iffco-Tokio General Insurance Company Limited,

   MRB Trade Center Shop No.12, 2^nd floor, 40-301-10, Bangarupet, Kurnool-518 001.

2. The Branch Manager,  Iffco-Tokio General Insurance Company Limited,

   2^nd floor, Uma Chambers, Banjara Hills Road, Punjagutta, Hyderabad-500 028.                                  ...Opposite ParTies

This complaint is coming on this day for orders in the presence of Sri Y.Sreenivasulu, Advocate for complainant and Sri P.Ramanjaneyulu, Advocate for opposite parties 1 and 2 and upon perusing the material papers on record, the Forum made the following.

                                               ORDER

     (As per Sri. M.Krishna Reddy, Male Member)

                                         C.C. No.37/2011

1.     This case is filed by the complaint under section 11 and 12 of C. P. Act, 1986 seeking a direction on opposite parties  for the payment of :-

1. Rs.99,645/- as expenditure incurred with interest.
2. Other reliefs as Forum may deem fit and proper.

2.    The complainant case is that he owned a tractor AP 21 M 9651 (Harvester) and insured with opposite parties under the policy No.42598162 dated 11-05-2009 by paying a premium of Rs.11,445/-.  While going to Urukunda Village on 04-11-2009, near Jammaladinne Village turning, the driver lost control and the tractor met with accident suffering damage.   The cleaner of the tractor gave police complaint.  The complainant got his tractor repaired by spending Rs.89,758/- and submitted a claim with opposite parties enclosing all original bills.   As the claim was repudiated by opposite parties, a legal notice was issued to him.  Despite the legal notice no action was taken by opposite parties though received it.  Hence this complaint is filed by the complainant before this Forum seeking appropriate reliefs. 

3.     Ex.A1 to Ex.A5 and sworn affidavit are filed by the complainant to prove his case.

4.     Up on receiving the notice of this Forum opposite party No.2 filed his written version denying his liability to the complainant’s claim.  The opposite party No.1 adopted the written version of opposite party No.2.  Opposite parties admitted that the complainant insured his vehicle bearing No. AP 21 M 9651 for declared value of Rs.8,90,000/- for the period from 30-04-2009 to 29-04-2010 vide the policy No.42598162.  The vehicle met with accident at Jammaladinne Village turning on 04-11-2009.  The policy was in force on the date of accident Sri E.Mukund, surveyor appointed by opposite parties assessed the loss to Rs.42,000/- and submitted his report.  Opposite party avered that complainant spent Rs.89,758/- on repairs in false.  Further opposite party said that two persons traveled on tractor though the seating capacity of the vehicle is one.   Also the complainant did not pay any premium covering the risk of the cleaner.  Hence it is clear violation of terms and conditions of the policy.  In view of the above circumstances the complainant is not entitled for any damages.  So there is no deficiency of service on the part of opposite parties.  Hence it is prayed for the dismissal of the case against them.

5.     Ex.B1 and Ex.B2 along with sworn affidavit are filed in support of his case.

6.     Both parties filed their Written Argument and submitted oral arguments.

7.     Hence the points for consideration are:

1. Whether the complainant made out any case against opposite party to prove the deficiency?

1. Whether the complainant is entitled to receive compensation?

1. For how much compensation?

8.      POINTS 1 and 2:- Ex.A1 / Ex.B1 the copy of policy.  The policy is in force and covers comprehensives risk of tractor for Rs.89,000/- from 30-04-2009 to 29-04-2010.  Ex.A3 is copy of F.I.R., accident case registered in P.S. Kosigi.  Ex.B2 is the survey report assessing the loss to Rs.42,000/-.  Admittedly the tractor AP 21 M 9651 covered with comprehensive insurance, met with accident near Jammaladinne turning and suffered damage and entitled for compensation.  Rejection of claim by opposite party on the ground that the policy terms and conditions are violated by traveling two persons not paying the premium covering the risk of cleaner is not acceptable.  Nowhere in the records it is mentioned that only one person should travel on tractor.  Further the complainant is not claiming compensation for the injuries suffered by the cleaner who was not covered under the policy.  Hence the rejection of claim for the tractor damages though covered with comprehensive risk by opposite party is not justified.  So deficiency on the opposite party is proved entitling the complainant for compensation. 

9.      Point No.3:- The claim of Rs.89,758/- towards the damages is excess.  The loss assessed by surveyor towards tractor damages for Rs.42,000/- is acceptable. 

10.    In the result, the complaint is allowed directing the opposite parties to pay repair charges of an amount of Rs.42,000/-  with interest 9% from the date of repudiation, Rs.1,000/- as compensation for mental agony and Rs.500/- as cost of the case.  Time for compliance is one month from the date of receipt of this order.

        Dictated to the stenographer, transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced by us in the open bench on this the 14^th day of November, 2011.  

Sd/-                                    Sd/-                                    Sd/-

MALE MEMBER                     PRESIDENT                 LADY MEMBER

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE                                                                                                                       Witnesses Examined

For the complainant : Nill                   For the opposite party : Nill

List of exhibits marked for the complainant :-

Ex.A1                Policy Bearing No.42598162 dated 11-05-2009.

Ex.A2.       Office copy of legal notice dated 01-06-2010 along with acknowledgement.

Ex.A3                Photo copy of F.I.R. No.237/2009 Kosigi Police Station

dated 05-11-2009.

Ex.A4        Photo copy of Purchase Bills (No.5).

Ex.A5        Photos (No.10).

List of exhibits marked for the opposite party:-

Ex.B1                Photo copy of Policy Bearing No.42598162

dated 11-05-2009.

Ex.B2        Photo copy of Motor Survey Report of E.Mukund

dated 27-03-2010.

 Sd/-                                  Sd/-                                    Sd/-

MALE MEMBER                 PRESIDENT                   LADY MEMBER

    // 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               :