IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ALAPPUZHA
Saturday the 15th day of October, 2011
Filed on 04.03.2010
Present
1. Sri. Jimmy Korah (President)
2. Sri. K. Anirudhan (Member)
3. Smt. N. Shajitha Beevi (Member)
in
C.C.No.53/2010
Between
Complainant :- | Opposite parties |
Sri. K.C.George, IV 54 A, Kottappuram,Kunnathukuzhiyil House, Aroor P.O, Aroor, Alappuzha. (By Adv.T.N.Manurice Vincent,Alappuzha) | 1) The Manager, TATA AIG General Insurance Company Ltd; Cochin, Ernakulam. 2) The Manager, KOTAK MAHINDRA PRIME LTD:Cochin,Ernakulam. |
O R D E R
SRI.JIMMY KORAH(PRESIDENT)
The complainant is case in a nutshell is as follows:The complainant is the registered owner of the Toyota Innova bearing Reg. No. KL 32-2604. On 22nd February 2010, the said, vehicle met with an accident and got damaged. At the time of the accident the vehicle was holding a valid insurance. The complainant on 15th October 2010 had duly remitted an amount of Rs.5559/- ( Rupees Five thousand five hundred and fifty nine only ) the premium meant for the renewal of the policy. With the result the policy was renewed and was in operation till midnight of 19th October 2010. Immediately after the accident, the complainant approached the opposite parties for the policy benefits. The complainant is entitled to an amount of Rs. 122436/- (Rupees one lakh twenty thousand four hundred and thirty six) with interest. But the opposite party for no valid reasons denied the policy benefits to the complainant. Got aggrieved on this, the complainant approached this Forum for compensation and other relief.
2. On notices being sent, the opposite parties turned up and filed separate versions . The crux of the 1st opposite part’s contention is that the premium for the policy was not properly remitted by the complainant. Though a cover note was issued to the vehicle, the policy was cancelled on non-remittance of the premium thereof, and the said factumof cancellation of the material policy was duly intimated to the complainant. According to the Ist opposite party, at the material time of accident there was no valid policy in existent. Even if the Forum finds liability on the part of the opposite party it might be subject to the terms and condition of the policy. The 2nd opposite party contends that the 2nd opposite party has nothing to do with the policy dispute. The second opposite party has unnecessarily being dragged to the instant case. According to the said opposite party, the complaint against the 2nd opposite party is only to be dismissed.
3. The evidence of the complainant consists of the testimony of the complainant as PW1, and the documents Exbts A1 to A5 were marked.
4. Bearing in mind the contentions of the parties the questions that crop up for consideration are :-
(a) Whether there was a valid policy at the material time of accident ?
(b) Whether the opposite parties are liable to pay the policy benefits to the opposite parties?
5. It appears that the opposite parties have neither disputed the material accident nor the damage occurred to the vehicle. The key contention of the 1st opposite party is that the complainant has not duly remitted the premium. Holding this momentous contention in mind, we with a surgeon’s precision made a searching survey of the materials placed on record by the parties. On a plain perusal of Exbt A1 to A5 it is unambiguously revealed that the complainant has remitted the premium amount demanded by the 1st opposite party. A close scrutiny of Exbt A4 survey report, it is infolded that the complainant has sustained damage to his vehicle. Going by the entire circumstance of the instant case, it is to be presumed that the policy was in existence at the time of the material accident. Needless to say, the complainant is entitled to relief.
7. For the forging facts and findings emerged herein above,we hold that the complainant is entitled to stated in the Ext A4 survey report amount Viz.79500/- to be obtained from the 1st opposite party with 7.5 % interest on deducting the full premium amount from the amount. On so deducting the said premium amount, the opposite party shall take into account the amount of Rs. 5559/-(Rupees five thousand five hundred fifty nine only ) remitted by the complainant towards premium. The 1st opposite party is further directed to pay the complainant an amount of Rs.5000/-( Rupees five thousand only) as compensation and Rs.2000/- (Rupees two thousand only ) as costs of this proceedings. The opposite party shall comply with the order of this Forum within 45 days of receipt of the same.
The complaint is allowed accordingly. No order as to cost.
Pronounced in open Forum on this the 15th day of October , 2011.
Sd/- Sri. Jimmy Korah
Sd/-Sri. K. Anirudhan
Sd/- Smt. N. Shajitha Beevi
Appendix:-
Evidence of the complainant:-
PW1 - Sri.K.C.George (Witness)
Ext.A1 - Copy of the insurance certificate
Ext.A2 - Letter given to complainant by opposite party
Ext.A3 - Cover Note
Ext.A4 -Motor Survey Report dated 24-07-2010
Ext.A5 - Letter given to complainant by opposite party
Evidence of the Opposite party:- Nil
// True Copy //
By Order
Senior Superintendent
To
Complainant/Opposite Parties/S.F.
Typed by:- sh/-
Compared by:-
