Orissa

Sambalpur

CC/161/2023

Manoranjan Pradhan, - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Manager, Shri. Ram General Insurance Co. Ltd., - Opp.Party(s)

Sri. B.Dash & Associates

28 May 2024

ORDER

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Sambalpur
Near, SBI Main Branch, Sambalpur
Uploaded by Office Assistance
 
Complaint Case No. CC/161/2023
( Date of Filing : 05 Oct 2023 )
 
1. Manoranjan Pradhan,
S/O-Sachita Pradhan, R/O/PO-A.Katapali, PS-Burla, Tahasil/Munsifi/Dist-Sambalpur, Odisha
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. The Manager, Shri. Ram General Insurance Co. Ltd.,
Branch at Geetanjali Complex, Lewis Road, Plot No. 2863/3719, Near Raja Rani Petrol Pump, Bhubaneswar-751002.
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. Dr. Ramakanta Satapathy PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MR. Sadananda Tripathy MEMBER
 
PRESENT:Sri. B.Dash & Associates, Advocate for the Complainant 1
 Sri. B.K.Purohit, Adv., Advocate for the Opp. Party 1
Dated : 28 May 2024
Final Order / Judgement

PRESIDENT, DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SAMBALPUR

Consumer Complaint No.-161/2024

Present-Dr. Ramakanta Satapathy, President,

  Sri. Sadananda Tripathy, Member,

 

Manoranjan Pradhan,

S/O-Sachita Pradhan,

R/O/PO-A.Katapali, PS-Burla,

Tahasil/Munsifi/Dist-Sambalpur, Odisha.            ….…......Complainant.

                                    -Vrs.-  

The Manager, Shri. Ram General Insurance Co. Ltd.,

Branch at Geetanjali Complex, Lewis Road,

Plot No. 2863/3719, Near Raja Rani Petrol Pump,

Bhubaneswar-751002.                                         …………........Opp.Parties

 

 

Counsels:-

  1. For the Complainant         :- Sri. B. Dash, Adv. & Associates
  2. For the O.P.                        :- Sri. B.K. Purohit, Adv.

 

Date of Filing:05.10.2023,  Date of Hearing :22.04.2024  Date of Judgement : 28.05.2024

Presented by Sri Sadananda Tripathy, Member.

  1. The case of the Complainant is that the Complainant purchased one Hyundai Car on dtd. 13.09.2022. It is a pre-owned car which stands recorded in the name of Bibhuti Bhusan Jena. As the insurance Policy of the aforesaid vehicle is compulsory to transfer the ownership, the agent of the OP advised the petitioner to deposit the premium amount of Rs. 5,689/- and accordingly the petitioner deposited the same amount of Rs. 5,689/- to the said agent of the OP and as such a policy issued in the name of the original registered owner having Policy No. 331008-31-23-001841. Thereafter the agent told the petitioner that after few days the insurance will be transferred to the name of the petitioner. The petitioner also paid the transfer fees to the agent on dtd. 29.09.2022 and sent the transfer of ownership copy to the agent on dtd. 29.09.2022. Thereafter neither the insurance policy was transferred in the name of the petitioner. Thereafter the petitioner visited the office of the OP several times, but no action was taken rather assurance was given him that the vehicle was insured, so nothing to be worried. On 28.04.2023 when the petitioner was returning in the aforesaid vehicle to his village A.Katapali, at Ghulipali Chowk near Bargarh, a cow suddenly came out from the divider and tried to move left side to right. The petitioner tried to save the life of the cow and turned the car to the extreme left side. Though the car was in moderate speed the front side of the car dashed against the divider. As a result, left part of front side was damaged and when the petitioner took  the vehicle to the garage, the mechanic told the petitioner that the repairing cost will be around Rs. 80,000/-. The petitioner also reported the matter through online before Bargarh Police Station on dtd. 11.05.2023. The petitioner  submitted the damage claim at the office of the OP but the claim was rejected citing “At the time of loss the same was not in possession”. The letter was issued to Bibhuti Bhusan Jena who was the earlier registered owner. On the date of accident on 28.04.2023 the car was insured and transfer fee and premium was already paid by the petitioner and in spite of several approach neither the OP paid the damage amount nor giving any satisfactory reply to the petitioner, but due to negligence the name of the petitioner was not inserted in the said policy. Finding no other alternative, the petitioner through his advocate served an advocate notice to the OP on 29.06.2023, which was duly received by the OP, but the OP remained silent and did not pay any heed to the notice. So there is deficiency in providing service and negligence in duties on the part of the OP to provide proper service to the petitioner which leads mentally harassment and financial loss to the petitioner.
  2. The Written Version of the  O.P is that as per the endorsement on transfer of ownership of the vehicle the policy   was changed in the name of the Complainant with effect from 05.55 PM of18.05.2023 and the same continued to be valid till the midnight at 12.06.2023, the new insured being Manoranjan Pradhan. An endorsement was issued to that effect upon receipt of Rs. 59.00 along with the endorsement schedule. One intimation relating to the damages of the vehicle was reported on 01.05.2023 at 11.41.37 AM to the Company call center. It was intimated that the accident of the vehicle took place on 28.04.2023 at 8.00 PM near bypass road of Bargarh. Immediately thereafter one surveyor was appointed as per the provisions of law to assess the loss to the vehicle. It was observed by the Insurance Company officials on 05.05.2023 that the vehicle was not in the name of Bibhuti Bhusan Jena, the insured against whom the policy was issued and accordingly Bibhuti Bhusan Jena had no insurable interest of the time of loss over the own damage of the vehicle, the Insurance Company expressed their inability to consider his claim. The letter claim was closed by the Insurance Company with an intimation to the insured Bibhutibhusan Jena. However, a liberty was given to the said Bibhuti Bhusan Jena to make any query within five days of receiving the letter, otherwise the Insurance Company would consider the claim as closed. Since, no query was received by the Insurance Company within the time limit, the claim was treated as closed.
  3. From the contentions of the both the parties, it is observed that the Policy was a valid Policy at the time of accident. Though the ownership of the vehicle was changed in the name of the Complainant but due to negligence of the agent of the OP and in spite of payment of the transfer fees to the agent of the OP on dtd. 29.09.22 and sent the transfer of ownership copy to the agent on dtd. 29.09.22, the name of the Complainant was not inserted in the said policy. For the faults of agent principal is liable. Hence deficiency in service found against the OP. Accordingly it is ordered.

ORDER

The case is disposed of on contest. The O.P is directed to pay the claims amount of Rs. 80,000/- to the Complainant, Rs. 35,000/- towards financial loss, mental agony and harassment as compensation and further Rs. 10,000/- towards cost & litigation expenses of the petition to the Complainant within 30 days from the date of order, failing which the amount will further carry with 9% interest per annum till realization to the complainant.

Order pronounced in the open Court today on 28th day of May, 2024.

Free copies of this order to the parties are supplied.

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Dr. Ramakanta Satapathy]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Sadananda Tripathy]
MEMBER
 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.