Karnataka

Chitradurga

CC/128/2019

Sri Syed Mujeebur Rahaman, S/o Syed Habibur Rahaman - Complainant(s)

Versus

The General Manager, Reliance General Insurance Company, - Opp.Party(s)

K.H.Sriramappa

20 Jul 2019

ORDER

COMPLAINT FILED ON : 06/02/2019

                         DISPOSED ON:20/07/2019

 

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHITRADURGA

 

CC. NO.128/2019 DATED: 20th JULY 2019

 

PRESENT :-         SRI.T.N.SREENIVASAIAH      :   PRESIDENT                                                     B.A., LL.B.,

SMT. JYOTHI RADHESH JEMBAGI

BSc.,MBA., DHA.,         :     LADY MEMBER

                             SRI. SHIVAKUMAR.K.N         :     MEMBER

                                      M.Com., LL.B.,

COMPLAINANT/S	Sri. Syed Mujeebur Rahaman, S/o Syed Habibur, Rahaman, Aged about 25 years, Owner of the Goods  Carriage Vehicle, Reg., NO.01-AE-0575, Main road, Opp., Vijaya Bank, Bada Makan, Chitradurga.   (Rep by Sri. K.H. Sriramappa, Advocate)
OPPOSITE PARTIES	1. Reliance General Insurance Company, Rept., by its Authorized Signatory, Registered Office, Reliance Centre, 19, Walchand Hirahchand Marg, Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400001. 2. Branch Manager, Reliance General Insurance Limited, No.1 and 2 1st Floor, Maganur Commercial, Complex, Near KSRTC Bus Stand, B.D.Road, Chitradurga.  (Rep by .OP and 2 Sri. B.M. Ravichandra, Advocate)

 

SRI. T.N. SREENIVASAIAH: PRESIDENT

ORDER

The complainant has filed this complaint U/s 12 of C.P. Act 1986 against the OPs for claiming compensation of Rs. 7,47,300/- along with interest at the rate of 12% from the date of repudiation till realization and compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- and such other reliefs.

        2. The brief facts of the case. The complainant  has purchased the 12 wheels Ashoka Leyland Goods Carriage Vehicle bearing Reg., No. KA-01-AE-0575, Engine No.YBH 680640 Chassis No. MB1KADYC4BAXC7428, Model 2011 from Syed Imran S/o Syed Ameer Hussain on 27/10/2017 and the said Syed Imran Executed sale agreement in favour of the complainant on same day and possession of the said vehicle has given to the complainant. Thereafter R.C. is changed in favour of the complainant. The Complainant has obtained the Insurance Policy from the OP No.2 vide Policy No. 706521823340000245 and policy in force from 13/07/2018 to 12/07/2019.

        3. The Said vehicle has met with an accident on 04/11/2018 at about 12-30 a.m. midnight nearby new Kundavada Village on NH-4 road near Davanagere and said vehicle completely damaged. The complainant have informed the same to Traffic Police Station, Davanagere. The Police was draw the  mahazar. The Complainant has submitted claim form to the OP. No.2 and for claiming the amount towards  damaged vehicle for Rs. 6,47,300/- with quotation. But the OP No.1 has repudiated the claim of the complainant on the grounds that the vehicle was plied without a permit as on date of accident.

        4. Further complainant submitted that the permit is valid from 20/05/2017 to 19/05/2022 and the accident occurred on 04/11/2018 at midnight. The previous owner of the said vehicle has obtained the permit from the Regional Transport Authority, Chitradurga same is valid from 20/05/2017 to 19/05/2022 and policy of the said vehicle is in force as on the date of the accident. The complainant has purchased the said vehicle on 27/10/2017. After purchased the said vehicle, the complainant again obtained permit from the RTO, Chitradurga on 17/11/2018 and still it is valid from 16/11/2018 to15/11/2023 and Complainant has also obtained the policy from the OP No.2 and same is in force as on the date of the accident. It is clearly goes to show that the said vehicle is having valid permit and policy as on the date of the accident. The OPs have repudiated the claim of the complainant on the false and frivolous ground, which amount to deficiency in service on the part of the OPs.  The OPs have committed unfair trade practice. The complainant has suffered from heavy loss due to said vehicle is scrapped and the repudiation made by the OPs and the complainant is also suffered from the shock and mental agony. Hence the OPs are liable to pay claim amount of Rs. 6,47,300/- with interest and compensation to the complainant.

        5. The cause of action for filing this complaint has arose on 28/12/2018, when the OPs  repudiated the claim of the complainant. The Op No.1 is registered Company of the OP No.2. The OP. No.1 has carried business with having branch office at Chitradurga through Op No.2 within the Jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Forum. Hence this Honble forum has got jurisdiction to entertain this complaint. Hence pray for allow the complaint.

6. After service of notice, one Sri. B.M. Ravichandra, Advocate appeared on behalf of OPs and filed their version. The allegations made in complaint are all false and not maintainable. The complainant has sworn to a false affidavit and the contention taken by the complainant in his complaint are all false and liable to be dismissed in limine. The complainant has not approached the Hon’ble Forum with clean hands as required under consumer protection Act and law of Insurance and also under policy issued by OPs under M.V. Act.

7. It is true that complainant is the R.C. Owner of Lorry bearing Reg. No.KA-01-AE-0575 and the said Lorry has been insured with OP through vide Policy No. 706521823340000245 for the period 13/07/2018 to 12/07/2019 and vehicle value (IDV) is Rs. 10,00,000/- only towards insured declared value and the said policy will be in force as per the terms and conditions of the policy, MV act conditions and confirmation of 64 VB.

8. That the complainant has intimated the accident of the vehicle to the Op insurance Company Chitradurga branch office in writing. The OP insurance Company has appointed surveyor by name Hemachandra G.B. who is a Surveyor and loss assessor for conducting final survey of the said vehicle. That the surveyor Hemachandra G.B. who has visited the place and surveyed the vehicle and after the completion of his final survey he has given his report stating insurers liability will be of Rs.1,87,990/- and also again he has conducted reinsertion of the vehicle and also he has taken the photos and the same was submitted to OP insurance company.

9. After obtaining of final survey and re-inspection of the vehicle the OP insurance company has asked for permit of the Lorry since it is a commercial vehicle and as per Section 66(1) of the MV Act any vehicle which is registered under commercial vehicle has to obtain permit and also he has given permit copy to the OP. Which is valid for the period 16/11/2018 to 15/11/2023 and there is no permit to the vehicle on the date of accident dated 05/11/2018, hence it is a violation of policy terms and conditions and M.V. Act conditions, hence the claim preferred by the complainant is stands repudiated the same was intimated to the complainant on 28/12/2018. Stating that the claim of the complainant was repudiated since there is no permit to the vehicle on the date of accident and said notice was sent to the complainant through RPAD and the same was served to the complainant. Hence pray for the dismissal of the complaint.

10. On behalf of complainant, complainant  examined as PW-1 by filing affidavit evidence and the documents Ex.A-1 to A-19 were got marked and closed his side. On behalf of OPs, one Sri. Pradeep D.S. S/o Siddana Gowda  D.G. has examined as DW-1 by filing the affidavit evidence and Ex.B-1 to B-6 documents have been got marked and closed their side.  

11.   Arguments of both sides heard.

12.   Now the points that arise for our consideration for decision of above complaint is that;

(1)  Whether the complainant prove that the OPs have committed deficiency of service in settling the claim of the complainants and entitled for the reliefs as prayed for in the above complaint?

              (2) What order?

        13.   Our findings on the above points are as follows:-

                 Point No.1:- Partly in Affirmative. 

Point No.2:- As per final order.

REASONS

14.   Point No.1:-There is no dispute between the both parties that the complainant is the absolute owner of the 12 wheels Ashok Layland goods carriage vehicle bearing Registration No. KA-01-AE-0575. The same has been purchased from Syed Imran S/o Syed Ameer Hussain.

15. After purchase the R.C. has been changed in the name of the complainant and policy also transfer in this name the same is in-force as on date of accident. After the incident the complainant has intimated the same to the OPs. After receiving the information from the complainant the OPs have  appointed  One Hemachandra G.B. surveyor. The said surveyor have visited spot and   surveyed the vehicle and submitted is report to the OPs. As per the survey report the loss of the damaged vehicle is of Rs. 1,87,990/-. After collecting all the document from the complainant, the OPs have repudiated the claim of the complainant in his letter dated 28/12/2018 and stating that has on date of accident the permit of the said vehicle is not valid. But the documents produced by the complainant i.e. Ex A-8 it clearly shows that the  previous vendor of the said vehicle was having valid permit from 20/05/2017 to 19/05/2022. After that the complainant has obtained the permit into his name from RTO Chitradurga on 17/11/2018. And still it is valid from 16/11/2018 to 15/11/2023. The incident happened on 04/11/2018 at about 12-30 a.m. But the OPs have taken contention in their version as on the date of incident the permit was not stands in the name of present complainant. But the previous vendor of the complainant was having valid permit on the date of incident. Such being the case the question of repudiation made by the OPs is not sustainable under law.

16. We have gone through the entire documents filed by the both sides and further there is no dispute between both parties that the complainant is the absolute owner of the above said vehicle. The same has been purchased from its vendor. As on the date of purchase the permit of the said vehicle is from 20/05/2017 to 19/05/2022. The complainant has obtained the permit from the concerned authority from 16/11/2018 to 15/11/2023. The incident was accrued on 04/11/2018 at about 12-30 a.m. The OPs have repudiated on the date of incident the permit was not stands in the name of complainant. As per the Ex-A-8 the permit is valid on the date of incident but the permit was stands in the name of previous owner of the said vehicle. When the permit was in force towards of the above said vehicle question of violating of permit does not arise. Because the permit of the said vehicle is continued unless changed in to the name subsequent owner. The repudiation made by the OPs is not sustainable under law. Hence the reputation made by the OPs have no merit-in-it. None settling the claim of the complainant, the complainant will be put into great loss and mental agony. Hence the Point No.1 is held partly affirmative.     And pass the following order.

                               

 

 

ORDER

          The complaint filed by the complainant U/s 12 of CP Act 1986

 is partly allowed.

       It is ordered that, the OPs are hereby directed to pay sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- towards repair charge of the damaged vehicle along with interest 6% p.a from the date of filing of the complainant till realization.

                It is further ordered that, the OPs are hereby directed to pay Rs.10,000/- towards compensation and Rs.5,000/- towards cost of the proceedings to the complainant. 

         It is further ordered that, the OP No.1 is hereby directed to comply the above order within 30 days from the date of this order.

 

(This order is made with the consent of Members after the correction of the draft on 20/07/2019 and it is pronounced in the open Court after our signatures)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

LADY MEMBER               MEMBER                 PRESIDENT

 

-:ANNEXURES:-

Witnesses examined on behalf of Complainant:

PW-1:-Complainant by filing affidavit evidence.

Witnesses examined on behalf of OP No.1 and 2:

DW-1:- Sri. Pradeep D.S. S/o Siddana Gowda D.G.Manager Legal Claims, Reliance General Insurance Company Limited by filing affidavit evidence.

Documents marked on behalf of Complainant:

01	Ex-A-1:-	Repudiation letter dated 28/12/2018.
02	Ex-A-2:-	Vehicle Registration Certificate (R.C)
03	Ex-A-3:-	Driving licence of complainant
04	Ex.A-4	Agreement of sale of vehicle.
05	Ex.A-5:-	Insurance Policy of the complainant
06	Ex.A-6:-	Insurance policy of previous owner.
07	Ex.A-7	Risk Assumption letter.
08	Ex.A-8	Permit Copy issued  by RTO
09	Ex.A-9	Permit Copy issued  by RTO
10	Ex.A-10	Certificate of Fitness issued by RTO
11	EX A-11	Spot Mahazar
12	Ex.A-12	Quotation
14	EX.A-13	HASV Service works Bill
14	EX.A-14 to 19	Photo with C.D.

 

Documents marked on behalf of OP No.1:

01	Ex-B-1:-	Insurance Policy
	EX-B-2:-	Final Survey report
	EX-B-3:-	Permit copy
	EX-B-4:-	Claim Form.
	EX-B-5:-	Repudiation letter
	EX-B-6:-	Postal Receipt.

 

 

 

LADY MEMBER               MEMBER                 PRESIDENT

KMS.,