Andhra Pradesh

Visakhapatnam-II

CC/44/2011

N. Srinivasarao - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Manager, Tata AIG General Insurance Company Limited - Opp.Party(s)

Gorle Prasad

09 Oct 2014

ORDER

                                              Date of Registration of the Complaint:07-02-2011 

                                                                                                Date of Order:09-10-2014

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMERS FORUM-II AT

                             VISAKHAPATNAM

 

P  r  e  s  e  n  t:

1.Sri H. Ananda Rao, M.A., L.L.B.,

     President           

2. Smt K. Saroja, M.A. B.L.,

     Lady Member 

                                3. Sri C.V. Rao,  M.A., B.L.,

                                     Male Member

 

                       Thursday, the 9^thday of October, 2014.

                             CONSUMER CASE No.44/2011

Between:-

Nammi Srinivasa Rao, S/o Late Appanna,

Hindu, aged 30 years, residing at Gollala

Talavalasa Village, Bheeminipatnam,

Visakhapatnam.

                                                                                        ….. Complainant

And:-

1.The Manager, Tata AIG General Insurance Co., Ltd.,

    II Floor, Block -A, My Home Tycoon, Kunanbagh,

    Begumpet, Hyderabad-16.  

2.The Branch Manager, Tata AIG General Insurance

    Co., Ltd., Visakhapatnam, Upstairs of ICICI Bank

    Dwaraka Nagar, Visakhapatnam.

                                                                                        …  Opposite Parties

                     

This case coming on 05.09.2014 for final hearing before us in the presence of Sri        Gorle Prasad Rao, & Sri B. Vasantha Rao, Advocates for the Complainant and Sri D. Siva Prasad, Advocate for the 1^st Opposite Party and the 2^nd Opposite Party being exparte and having stood over till this date for consideration, this Forum made the following:

 

                                                ORDER

        (As per Smt. K. Saroja Honourable Lady Member on behalf of the Bench)

 

1.       The case of the Complainant in brief is that the Complainant is the owner of Auto Rickshaw bearing registration No. AP 31 TU 5480 with the 2^nd Opposite Party vide Policy No.015072730200, valid from 22.09.2009 to 21.09.2010.  The said vehicle met with an accident on 05.03.2010, immediately the Complainant informed to the local office i.e., the 2^nd Opposite Party over phone.   Then the 2^nd opposite Party sent his survivor to the accident spot and the survivor inspected the accident spot and also took photographs of damaged vehicle and advised the Complainant to submit the estimation of damages caused to the vehicle from any Bajaj Authorized Service Centre.   As per the direction of the survivor the Complainant approached Lakshmi Devi Auto Links who estimated loss for Rs.42,430/- dated 06.03.2010.   As per the advice of the survivor the Complainant got repaired the damaged vehicle and incurred an amount of Rs.30,076/- towards spare parts and Rs.2,200/- towards labour charges and the Complainant submitted all necessary documents and original bills to the 1^st Opposite Party for settlement of the claim.   The 1^st Opposite Party issued a letter to the Complainant dated 15.04.2010 that the claim has been repudiated on some reasons.   The Complainant issued a legal notice received by the 1^st Opposite Party and gave a reply dated 23.06.2010 with false and untenable allegations.   Hence, this Complaint.

 

2.       a) to direct the Opposite Party to settle the accident claim of vehicle of the Complainant for Rs.32,276/- (Rupees Thirty two thousand two hundred and seventy six only):

          b) to direct the Opposite Parties to pay Rs.20,000/- towards compensation for causing mental agony and physical strain to the Complainant;

          c) to pay costs of this Complaint; and

          d) pass such other relief or reliefs as the Forum may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

           

3.       The 2^nd Opposite Party did not appear before this Forum.   Hence, it was set exparte and remained exparte.

 

4.       The 1^st Opposite Party strongly resisted the claim of the Complainant by contending, as can be seen from its counter.    The 1^st Opposite Party denied all the allegations made by the Complainant stating that they have repudiated the claim of the Complainant as the driver of the Complainant was not holding valid and effective driving licence to drive Auto Rickshaw.    The driver of the Complainant only authorized to drive the Motor Cycle with gear (MCWG).  So, they have no liability to pay any reliefs asked by the Complainant.

 

 

5.       At the time of enquiry, both the Opposite Parties filed their affidavits as well as written arguments to support their contentions.     Exs.A1 to A7 are marked for the Complainant.   Exs.B1 to B4 are marked for the 1^st Opposite Party.    Commissioner Report is marked as Ex.C1.  Heard both sides.

 

 

6.       ExA1 is the Cash Bill issued by the Lakshmi Devi Auto Links.   Ex.A2 is the Estimation made by the Lakshmi Devi Auto Links.   Ex.A3 is the Insurance Policy.   Ex.A4 is the Repudiation letter issued by the 1^st Opposite Party.   Ex.A5 is the Registered Lawyer’s Notice issued by the Complainant dated 18.06.2010.   Ex.A6 is the reply letter issued by the 1^st Opposite Party dated 23.06.2010 to the Complainant.  Ex.A7 is the licence of the driver G. Appala Naidu.

 

7.       Ex.B1 is the Insurance Policy.   Ex.B2 is Form-24.   Ex.B3 is the  issue of Driving Licence issued by Additional Licencing Authority, Visakhapatnam.   Ex.B4 is the Survey Report.

 

8.       The fact shown from the documents Ex.A1 reveals that the Complainant incurred expenditure towards costs on spare parts and labour charges for Rs.32,276/-.   Ex.A2 reveals that the Lakshmi Devi Auto Links estimated loss of the alleged vehicle Rs.42,430/-.   Ex.A7 reveals that the driver has licence LMV MCWG Light Motor-non- Transport and (Transport Vehicles LMV and it is valid till 16.09.2010.

 

9.       The point that would arise for determination in the case is:-

Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties.  The Complainant is entitled to any reliefs asked for?

 

10.       After careful perusal of the case record, this Forum finds that the there is no dispute regarding the accident of the insured vehicle.    Though, the driver has driving licence for non-Transport LMV, MCWS & Transport LMV and also badge No. 609592001.   So, the driver who was driving Auto Rickshaw on the date of accident is having licence to drive transport LMV and was also having badge.   According to Ex.A7 the driver has licence to drive transport LMV.    EX.C1 is the Advocate Commissioner’s Report which shows that the alleged accident vehicle driver Appala Naidu is having light motor transport licence with badge.   The 1^st Opposite Party filed some citations to support his contention.   The 1^st Opposite Party failed to establish that the driver has no licence to drive Auto Rickshaw.   Ex.A7 issued by the Additional Registering Authority, Visakhapatnam is authenticated.   We are of the considered opinion that the driver has valid licence at the time of accident.   So, the Complainant is entitled to expenses incurred by him towards spare parts and labour charges i.e., Rs.32,276/- with interest, some compensation and costs too.

 

10.     In the result, this Complaint is allowed directing the Opposite Parties 1 and 2: a) to pay an amount of Rs.32,276/- (Rupees thirty two thousand two hundred and seventy six only) with interest @ 9% p.a. from 18.06.2010 to till the date of actual realization, and to pay b) a compensation of Rs.3,000/- (Rupees three thousand only) and c) Costs of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only) to the Complainant.   Advocate fee is fixed at Rs.2,000/- (Rupees two thousand only).   Time for compliance one month from the date of this order.

         

Dictated to the Steno, transcribed by him, corrected and pronounced by us in the Open Forum, this 9^th day of October, 2014.

 

Sd/-                                     Sd/-                                          Sd/-  

President                            Male Member                      Lady Member

                                     

 

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

For the Complainant:-

NO.	DATE	DESCRIPTIONOFTHEDOCUMENTS	REMARKS
Ex.A01	25.03.2010	Cash Bill issued by the Lakshmi Devi Auto Links.	Original
Ex.A02	06.03.2010	Estimation issued by the Lakshmi Devi Auto Links	Original
Ex.A03	22.09.2009	Certificate of Insurance and Policy Schedule.	Original
Ex.A04	15.04.2010	Repudiation letter issued by the 1st Op	Original
Ex.A05	18.06.2010	Registered Lawyer’s Notice issued by the Complainant’s counsel to 1st OP.	Office copy
Ex.A06	23.06.2010	Reply letter issued by the 1st Op.	Original
Ex.A07	17.09.2007	Driving Licence	Photo copy

For the 1^st Opposite Party:-

                                               

NO.	DATE	DESCRIPTIONOFTHEDOCUMENTS	REMARKS
Ex.B01	22.09.2009	Certificate of Insurance and Policy Schedule.	Original
Ex.B02	23.10.2008	Form-24, B-Register of Motor Vehicle.	Attestation copy
Ex.B03	23.03.2000	Grant of issue of Driving Licence issued by the Additional Licencing Authority, Vsp.	Original
Ex.B04	10.03.2010	Survey Report	Original

 

Ex.C1     30.01.2012        Advocate Commissioner’s Report        Original

 

Sd/-                                Sd/-                                          Sd/-

President                       Male Member                                             Lady Member