By. Sri. Chandran Alachery, Member:-
The complaint is filed U/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 for an Order directing the opposite party to pay a sum of Rs.72,022/- with interest at the rate of 18% per annum from the date of accident till payment as the repairing cost incurred by the complainant and to pay Rs.25,000/- as compensation and cost of the proceedings.
2. The complainant's case in brief is as follows:- The complainant is the RC owner of the vehicle KL 12 D 8199 Bus having valid route permit. Earnings from the said vehicle is the only livelihood of the complainant. The vehicle was insured with the opposite party under package policy scheme as per policy No.3373/00357739/000/00. During the validity period of the policy, the vehicle met with an accident on 15.03.2012 at Valliyoorkavu Junction, while the bus was coming from Mananthavady to Valliyoorkavu side, a dog crossed in front of the vehicle and when the vehicle was suddenly braked, the vehicle skid and hit against near by electric post and shop building and the vehicle also sustained substantial damages. The vehicle was repaired at Akshaya Body Builders, Beenachi at the expense of the complainant for which he has to spent Rs.24,500/-. The damages sustained to the shop building was also repaired and incurred an amount of Rs.28,500/- and the electric post was replaced at the expense of the complainant and the complainant spent Rs.19,022/- for that also. The matter of accident and repairing has intimated to the opposite party immediately and preferred claim application. But the opposite party did not consider the application and delayed it and thus, there is serious deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party. Hence this compliant.
3. On receipt of the complaint, Notice was issued to the opposite party and the opposite party appeared in Forum and filed version. In the version, the opposite party contented that the complainant has not produced the original documents as per the terms and conditions with regard to the own damage claim, ie the GD extract from Police station, Original Bill or claim form for third party claim and further states that there is no deficiency of service from the part of opposite party and the opposite party sanctioned a sum of Rs.9,850/- towards the claim as per the conditions of the policy and prayed for dismiss the complaint with cost.
4. On considering the complaint, documents and evidence of both parties, the Forum raised the following points for consideration:-
1. Whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party?
2. Relief and Cost.
5. Point No.1:- The complainant is examined as PW1 and Exts.A1 to A7 is marked. The opposite party did not adduce oral evidence. Ext.A1 is the copy of RC which is verified with original. Ext.A2 series 3 in number are the original bills of electricity poles repair and Ext.A3 is the copy of policy schedule cum certificate for Motor insurance. Ext.A4 is the copy of bills issued by Akshaya body builders, Beenachi for repairing the vehicle. Ext.A5 is the original receipt issued by the owner of the building which is damaged in accident. Ext.A6 is the copy of certificate issued by the Sub-Inspector of Police, Mananthavady Police station stating that the vehicle KL 12 D 8199 is met with an accident on 15.03.2012 at 1.45 hrs at Valliyoorkavu. Ext.A7 is the receipt issued by Kerala State Electricity Board for replacing electricity poles. The contention of the complainant is that he had informed the opposite party about the accident immediately after the accident and claim application is submitted. The case of the complainant is that he had received the claim form from the agent of opposite party from Bathery and the claim form is submitted at Bathery office of opposite party. In the claim form, the complainant stated that he had claimed for damages to vehicle, damages to building and electricity post. But the opposite party denies it. After filing of this complaint, the opposite party issued a cheque for Rs.9,850/- towards the claim to the complainant's vehicle. The opposite party did not produce any document to support for the denial of third party insurance claim and to disprove the case of the complainant. Damages to building and electric post are not settled but repudiated. In cross-examination of complainant by the opposite party nothing is brought out against the complainant. The complainant produced documents to prove his claim. The opposite party did not produce documents even with respect to policy conditions. The opposite party settled only part of claim. According to complainant, the third party claims are settled by complainant himself as per the direction of agent of the opposite party. This contention of the complainant isnot denied by the opposite party. So by analyzing the evidence, the Forum found that the opposite party denied to allow third party claims without any valid reasons. So there is deficiency of service from the part of opposite party in dealing the claim application and allowing the full claim. The complainant is entitled to get the third party claim which is already settled by the complainant from the opposite party. The opposite party is liable to pay the third party claims to the complainant. So the Point No.1 is found accordingly.
6. Point No.2:- Since the Point No.1 is found in favor of the complainant, the complainant is entitled to get the cost and compensation. The opposite party is liable to compensate for their deficiency.
In the result the complaint is partly allowed and the opposite party is directed to pay Rs.62,172/- (Rupees Sixty Two Thousand One Hundred and Seventy Two) only being the balance amount of total claim of Rs.72,022/- to the complainant with 12% interest from the date of filing of this complaint till payment. The opposite party is also directed to pay Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One Thousand) only towards compensation and Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One Thousand) only towards the cost of the proceedings. The opposite party shall comply the Order within 30 days of the receipt of this Order.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by him and corrected by me and Pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 10th day of March 2014.
Date of Filing:16.06.2012.
PRESIDENT :Sd/-
MEMBER :Sd/-
MEMBER :Sd/-
/True Copy/
Sd/-
PRESIDENT, CDRF, WAYANAD.
APPENDIX.
Witness for the complainant:
PW1. Salim. Complainant.
Witness for the Opposite Parties:
Nil.
Exhibits for the complainant:
A1. Copy of Registration Certificate.
A2. Receipts (3 Nos).
A3. Copy of Insurance Policy.
A4. Copy of Estimate. Dt:16.03.2012.
A5. Receipt. Dt:15.03.2012.
A6. Copy of Certificate. Dt:15.03.2012.
A7. Receipt. Dt:19.03.2012.
Exhibits for the opposite Parties.
Nil.
Sd/-
PRESIDENT, CDRF, WAYANAD.
