BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-I, U.T. CHANDIGARH ======== Consumer Complaint No | : | 526 of 2010 | Date of Institution | : | 30.08.2010 | Date of Decision | : | 12.05.2011 |
Raj Kumar s/o Sh.Har Bhagwan resident of Village and Post Office Ambli, Tehsil, Naraingarh, District Ambala, Haryana. ….…Complainant V E R S U S 1. The ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd. through its M.D. Zenith House, Keshavrao Khade Marg, Mahalaxmi, Mumbai-400 034. 2. The ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd. through its Branch Manager, Quit Office 10, 1st and IInd Floor, Sector 40-B, Chandigarh. ..…Opposite Parties CORAM: SH.P.D.GOEL, PRESIDENT SH.RAJINDER SINGH GILL, MEMBER DR.(MRS) MADANJIT KAUR SAHOTA, MEMBER Argued by:Sh.Ashok Asuri, Counsel for Complainant. Sh.Sandeep Suri, Counsel for OPs. PER SH. P.D. GOEL, PRESIDENT It is case of the complainant that he purchased second hand Maruti Car bearing registration No.CH03-N-1917 from Sh.Vishal Maggon s/o Sh.Subhash Chander, resident of House No.1217, Pushpak Complex, Sector 49-B, Chandigarh. The said car was insured vide insurance policy No.MAR10127668 dated 18.3.2009. The OP company, while issuing the policy, has assessed the value of the car to the tune of Rs.90,000/-. The said insurance policy was valid from 26.3.2009 to 25.3.2010. According to the complainant, the information with regard to the sale of the vehicle has been given to OP No.2 alongwith affidavit of seller/owner of the vehicle. The seller has no objection, in case, the policy is transferred in the name of the complainant. It is further the case of the complainant that on the unlucky day of 2.3.2010, the said car met with an accident and got totally damaged. Thereafter, the complainant submitted the claim with OP-2 on 11.3.2010 for the reimbursement of Rs.1,32,080/-. The surveyor of the OPs conducted a survey and assured to reimburse the amount at the earliest. The complainant alleged that his claim has been illegally repudiated by the OPs, hence this complaint. 2. OPs filed reply and stated that the complainant is neither the insured under the policy nor the policy stands in his name nor the registration is in his name. The complainant has no locus standi to file the present complaint. The OP has never been intimated regarding the transfer of the policy. It is further replied that the insured has no insurable interest in the vehicle and the claim has been rightly repudiated. Pleading that there has been no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on their part prayer for dismissal of the complaint has been made. 3. Parties led evidence in support of their contentions. 4. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also perused the record. 5. It is an admitted fact that on the date of the accident, the vehicle was insured with Insurance Company-OP for the period from 26.03.2009 to 25.3.2010 vide insurance policy (Annexure C-1). 6. Annexure C-4 is the copy of the RC of vehicle no. CH-03-N-1917 and its perusal make it clear that Sh.Vishal Maggon is the registered owner of the said vehicle. The vehicle in question has been sold to the complainant as is evident from affidavit (Annexure C-5) placed on record by the complainant himself. The complainant has further admitted vide para No.1 of the complaint that he had purchased the vehicle in question from Sh.Vishal Maggon. 7. The claim in question has been repudiated by the OP on the ground that while processing the claim, it was observed that on the date of accident, complainant had no insurable interest in vehicle no.CH-03-N-1917. That complainant had not got the insurance policy transferred in his name as per the provisions of GR No.17of the India Motor Tariff. 8. Now the only point which calls for determination from this Court is whether the complainant had insurable interest in the vehicle in question on the date of accident? The answer to this is in the negative. 9. Admittedly, Sh.Vishal Maggon had sold the vehicle in question to the complainant. The accident of the vehicle took place on 02.03.2010, when GR-17 and not GR-10 of the Indian Motor Vehicle Rules was applicable in view of which the transferee has to apply to the insurance company for transfer of the insurance policy in his favour and also to pay Rs.50/- as fee for this purpose. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of G.Govindan vs. New India Assurance Co. Ltd., 1999(2) PLR, 274, has held that under the old Motor Vehicle Act, there is no automatic transfer of the insurance policy qua other claims than third party claims. The entire case law was discussed by The Hon'ble Supreme Court in that case. Following the said principle of law, the Hon'ble National Commission in case of Om Parkash Sharma vs. National Insurance Company and others , 1V( 2008) CPJ , 65 ( National Commission) held that section 157 of the Motor Vehicle Act applies to third party risks and not to own damage claims. It was also held that if the insurance policy was not got transferred by the transferee in his favour, he would have no locus standi to file the complaint. The matter again came up before the Hon'ble National Commission in the case of Madan Singh vs. United India Insurance Company and others , 1 (2009) CPJ, 158 (National Commission). In that case, the case law on the said subject was discussed and the same proposition was reiterated by the Hon'ble National Commission that in such cases, the transfer of the insurance policy is necessary to claim benefit for own damage claims. Similar was the view taken by the Hon'ble Punjab State Commission in case titled as National Insurance Company vs. Arjun Singh ,2010 (2) CLT,240. 10. Thus, it is held that the complainant has no insurable interest in the vehicle on the date of accident. It is made clear that the present case is squarely covered by GR-17, referred to above and the law relating to it has been discussed in para supra(s). 11. As a result of the above discussion, it is held that there is no deficiency in service on the part of the OP, consequently, the complaint is dismissed. No order as to costs. 12. Copy of the order be sent to the parties as per rules. File be consigned to the record. | Sd/- | Sd/- | Sd/- | 12.05.2011 | [Madanjit Kaur Sahota] | [Rajinder Singh Gill] | [P.D.Goel] | | Member | Member | President |
| | MR. RAJINDER SINGH GILL, MEMBER | HONABLE MR. P. D. Goel, PRESIDENT | DR. MRS MADANJIT KAUR SAHOTA, MEMBER | | 
