Haryana

Karnal

CC/154/2019

Balkar Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Iffco Tokio General Insurance - Opp.Party(s)

S.S. Chauhan

22 Jan 2020

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM KARNAL.

 

                                                          Complaint No. 154 of 2019

                                                          Date of instt.15.03.2019

                                                          Date of Decision 22.01.2020

 

Balkar Singh son of Shri Karam Singh, resident of village Budanpur Abad, District Karnal.

                                                 …….Complainant.

                                              Versus

 

1. The Iffco Tokio General, Plot no.2 B & C 3^rd floor, sector 28-A, Chandigarh, through its Chief Manager.

2. Sh. Yatin Kalra, Surveyor Loss Assessor, Valuer of Iffco Tokio General Insurance, H. no.93, Sector-8, Part II Karnal.

                                                                         …..Opposite Parties.

 

           Complaint u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act. 

 

Before    Sh. Jaswant Singh……President. 

      Sh.Vineet Kaushik ………..Member

                Dr. Rekha Chaudhary…….Member

 

 Present:  Shri S.S.Chauhan Advocate for complainant.

                   Shri Atul Mittal Advocate for opposite parties.

                 

                   (Jaswant Singh President)

ORDER:                    

 

                        This complaint has been filed by the complainant u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 on the averments that complainant got insured his bike bearing registration no.HR05AX8100 from the OP no.1 through his agent namely Sanjay and the OP no.1 issued a policy bearing no.27841105 to the complainant. On 07.07.2018, at about 4.15 p.m. the complainant was going to village Budanpur Abad from District courts Karnal on his motorcycle. The said motorcycle was being driven by the complainant on his due left hand side on slow and moderate speed. When they reached near the bridge of Sector-6 Government College Chowk G.T. Road Karnal, then a person namely Ravinder came from behind i.e. Ambala side while driving his Safari bearing no.PB-23-T-1071 in rash and negligent manner and struck against the said motorcycle of the complainant and as a result of which the complainant sustained fracture on left foot and injuries on the other vital parts of his body. The complainant was hospitalized and he was admitted in the Kalpana Chawla Government Medical College cum Hospital Karnal and also got his follow up treatment for several days in this regard. An FIR no.578 dated 07.07.2018 under sections 279/304A/336/337 of IPC was got registered qua the said accident in Police Station Civil Lines Karnal on the statement of complainant against aforesaid Ravinder. In the said accident the bike was also completely damaged and Deepak the nephew of the complainant duly informed the OP no.1 and his agent within time regarding the said accident. The complainant has filed a petition regarding his injuries/disabilities before the learned M.A.C.T. Karnal. After the said accident the motorcycle in question was taken in police custody and the same was released on 9.8.2018 on superdari as per order dated 8.8.2018 of the Competent Court. After taking the bike on superdari the nephew of the complainant namely Deepak handed over the said bike to the agency i.e. Luxmi Automobile Gharaunda, and all the aforesaid documents with claim formalities in the aforesaid agency on 10.08.2018 and Shri Narender Surveyor asked that the bike in total loss. Thereafter, complainant requested the OPs so many times to release his claim but OPs always postponed the matter on one pretext of the other and lastly repudiated the claim of the complainant on the false ground. In this way there was deficiency in service on the part of the OPs. Hence complainant filed the present complaint.

2.             Notice of the complaint was given to the OP, who appeared and filed written version raising preliminary objections with regard to maintainability; locus standi; cause of action and concealment of true and material facts. On merits, it is admitted fact that the motorcycle no.HR-99-TP-1525/2016 of the complainant was insured with OP, vide policy no.27841105. The claim of the complainant thoroughly processed by the OP and found that the alleged vehicle was damaged on 07.07.2018 and company was intimated after a delay of 5 days. As per the policy condition no.1 the insured was duly bound to inform the accident of the vehicle immediately to insurer as well as to the concerned police station after the incident came to his notice. On account of delayed intimation, the OP company was deprived of its legitimate right to get an enquiry conducted into the alleged damaged/theft of vehicle and make an endeavor to recover the same. Hence claim lodged by the complainant was repudiated as No Claim. It is further pleaded that the claim of the complainant was thoroughly processed by the OPs by way of appointment of Yatin Kalra, Surveyor & Loss Assessor, who thoroughly investigated the claim of the complainant and submitted the detailed report dated 17.12.2018, vide which he assessed the loss to the tune of Rs.33,000/- which was subject to the approval and terms and conditions of the policy. It is further pleaded that complainant had not submitted all the required documents in the company and various letters were sent to him. Hence, the complaint of the complainant is liable to be dismissed being not maintainable. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the OPs in repudiating the claim of the complainant. The other allegations made in the complaint have been denied and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

3.             Complainant tendered into evidence his affidavit Ex.CW1/A and documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C8 and closed the evidence on 06.09.2019.

4.             On the other hand, OPs tendered into evidence affidavit of Sameer Gupta Ex.OW1/A, affidavit of Yatin Kalra Ex.OW2/A and documents Ex.OP1 to Ex.OP9 and closed the evidence on 10.01.2020.

6.             We have heard the learned counsel of both the parties and perused the case file carefully and have also gone through the evidence led by the parties.

7.             The case of the complainant, in brief, is that he got insured his vehicle bearing registration no. HR05AX8100 from the OP no.1, vide policy no.27841105, valid from 01.11.2017 to 31.10.2018. The IDV of the vehicle was Rs.42,100/-. On 07.07.2018 the said motorcycle of the complainant was met with an accident and in this regard an FIR no.578 dated 07.07.2018 was got registered under section 279/304-A/336/337 of IPC in Police Station Civil Lines Karnal. Complainant informed the OPs in this regard and lodged the claim. Complainant also submitted the relevant documents with the OPs. Thereafter, complainant requested the OPs so many times to release the claim of the motorcycle but OP did not pay any claim to the complainant and lastly repudiated the same on the false ground.

8.             On the other hand, the case of the OP, in brief, is that complainant informed the OP after delay of five days. Thus, it is a breach of condition no.1 of the policy. As per the condition no.1, notice shall be given in writing to the company immediately upon the occurrence of any accidental loss or damaged in the event of any claim and thereafter the insured shall have all such information and assistance as the company shall required. Hence the claim of the complainant was rightly repudiated by the OPs.

9.             Admittedly, the vehicle in question of the complainant met with an accident during the subsistence of the policy, and in this regard an FIR Ex.C1 was lodged on the same day of occurrence. As per the version of the OP, complainant intimated the OP regarding the incident after delay of 42 days. No doubt the complainant has violated the terms and conditions of the insurance policy as alleged by the OP but there would have been no justification for the OP for denying the claim of the complainant in its entirety only for such violation of term and condition.

10.            In view of authority cited in Revision Petition no.1870 of 2015(NC) decided on 14.08.2018 titled as New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Versus Thirath Singh Brar and authority of our own Hon’ble State Commission in First Appeal no.717 of 2016 decided on 6.4.2017 titled as United India Insurance Company Limited and others Versus Anshul Bansal. In both judgments it was held that in case of any breach of warranty/condition of the policy the insurer is liable to pay 75% of admissible claim on non-standard basis.

11.            The proposition of law laid down by Hon’ble National Commission and Hon’ble State Commission Haryana is fully applicable to the facts of the present case. In the present case complainant violated the terms of the policy regarding delay in intimation to the OP but the complainant lodged the FIR on the same day. Consequently, the complainant is held entitled to get 75% of the insured amount.

12.            Moreover, OP appointed Mr. Yatin Kalra Investigator & Loss Assessor, who after surveying the vehicle in question, submitted his report dated 17.12.2018 as Ex.OP9, vide which he assessed the loss to the tune of Rs.33,000/-, which is almost 75% of the IDV of the vehicle. Hence the complainant is entitled for 75% of the insured amount.

13.           As a sequel to the foregoing discussion, we accept the complaint partly and direct the OP no.1 to pay 75% of the insured amount i.e. Rs.31,500/- to the complainant.  We further direct the OP no.1 to pay Rs.10,000/- to the complainant on account of mental agony and harassment suffered by him and  Rs.5500/- for the litigation expense. The complainant is also directed to transfer the vehicle in question in the name of OP and also deposit the salvage of the vehicle with OP.  This order shall be complied within 30 days from the receipt of copy of this order. The parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced

Dated:22.01.2020                                                                       

                                                                      President,

                                                              District Consumer Disputes

                                                               Redressal Forum, Karnal.      

 

 

         (Vineet Kaushik)         (Dr. Rekha Chaudhary)

            Member                         Member