Kerala

Kannur

CC/165/2024

Abdurahiman Velichathankandy - Complainant(s)

Versus

The National Insurance Company Ltd., - Opp.Party(s)

30 Oct 2024

ORDER

IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
KANNUR
 
Complaint Case No. CC/165/2024
( Date of Filing : 19 Mar 2024 )
 
1. Abdurahiman Velichathankandy
S/o Abdul Azeez.K.V,Velichathankandy House,Chembilode,P.O.Mowanchery,Kannur-670613.
2. Rasheeda.K
W/o Abdurahiman Velichathankandy House,chembilode,P.O.Mowanchery,Kannur-670613.
3. Roshina Rijil. P.K
W/o Late Mohammed Rashad,Alankar Manzil,Edakkandy Valappu,P.O.Templegate,Thalassery Taluk,Kannur-670102.
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. The National Insurance Company Ltd.,
Kozhikode Division 1,4th Floor,Parco towers,PM Taj Road,Kozhikode-673001.
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MRS. RAVI SUSHA PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MRS. Moly Kutty Mathew MEMBER
 HON'BLE MR. Sajeesh. K.P MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
 
Dated : 30 Oct 2024
Final Order / Judgement

SMT. RAVI SUSHA: PRESIDENT

            This complaint has been filed U/s 35 of Consumer Protection Act 2019, seeking to get an order directing opposite parties to pay the sum of Rs.17,73,233/- with future interest @9% from the date of complaint till realization and cost of proceedings to the complainant.

            Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the complainants 1 and 2 are respectively the father and mother of deceased Mohammed Rashad.  The third complainant is his wife.  Mohammed Rashad died on 04/06/2023 after a motor accident occurred on 01/06/2023.  The said Mohammed Rashad on 01/06/2023 was driving a car bearing registration          No. KL-18-Y-8245 from Thalassery to Wyanad.  When the car reached the place Karumala, Uppupetti at about 4.30 AM the car hit on the compound wall of a House and the said Mohammed Rashad sustained grievous injury on his head and was taken to Govt. Medical College, Kozhikode and thereafter to Meithra Hospital, Kozhikode.  While he was undergoing treatment at Meitra Hospital he died on 04/06/2023.  The above said Vehicle No. KL-18-Y-8245 was insured with the OP for unlimited risk.  The period of insurance is from 23/08/2023 to 22/05/2024.  The compulsory PA cover premium for owner and driver has been paid.  The claim is limited to Rs.15,00,000/- as per the terms of the policy.  The 3rd complainant had issued a lawyer notice to the OP on 09/08/2023 claiming the compensation due under the policy. They received the notice on 10/08/2023, but no reply was sent nor is the compensation paid.  The OP has willfully declined to pay the compensation as per the terms of the policy.  This amounts deficiency in service on the part of the OP which caused much mental agony and sufferings.  Hence this complaint.

            OP denies the allegations.  According to OP the complaint is not maintainable either in law or on facts.  This OP submits that the Motor car bearing registration No.KL-18-Y-8245 was insured with this OP in favour of Rafeeeque, Mriyas, Azhiyur, Korothi Road, Calicut-673108, Kerala vide policy No.57030031231149321831 for the period from 23/05/2023 to 22/05/2024.  This OP submits that the insurance cover to the vehicle depends upon the terms and conditions of the policy as well as the provisions of Motor Vehicle Act.  So it is not correct to say that vehicle No.KL-18-Y-8245 was insured with the OP for unlimited risk.  This OP submits that at the relevant time of the accident the Registered Owner and insured of the vehicle Motor Car bearing registration No.KL-18-Y-8245  was Rafeeque, Mriyas, Azhiyur, Korothi Road< Kozhikode-670108.  This OP submits that the P.A Cover under the policy is covered only for Owner-Driver of the insured Vehicle. Whereas in this case the deceased driver of the Motor Car was not the Owner-Driver at the relevant time of the accident.   This OP submits that the complainants knowing the fact that the vehicle was driven by a person other than the registered owner of the vehicle preferred this claim with ill motive for an unlawful gain.  The condition of personal accident cover has been well enumerated in the policy Sec.III Personal Accident cover for Owner-Driver.  This OP states that since the deceased was not the registered owner-driver of the vehicle at the relevant time of the accident the complainants are not entitled to claim compensation on account of the death of the driver of the vehicle Mohammed Rashad as the claim does not come under the purview of the Sec.III Personal accident Cover for Owner-Driver as well as Provisions of Motor Vehicle Act.  Hence, prayed for the dismissal of this complaint.

            Complainant No.1 filed chief-affidavit and documents. Examined as Pw1.  Marked Ext.A1 to Ext.A6.  Pw1 was cross examined by OP.  On the side of OP, the policy certificate in dispute was marked as Ext.B1.

            After that the learned counsel of both parties made argument with judgments of higher court.

            It was not disputed that the insured person in the disputed policy is Mr. Rafeeque (Ext.B1) and he is the registered owner of the insured vehicle having Registration No: New Swift XXI BS-KL18Y8245.  It is not in dispute that the accident happened within the policy period and the deceased in this case Muhammed Rashad was driven the vehicle at the time of accident.  Further Muhammed Rashad died due to the said accident.  FIR was registered Ext.A1.  Ext.A2 is the death certificate.

            Here the driving license of the deceased was not furnished from the side of complainant.

            OP submits that as per policy section III- personal Accident cover for owner –driver, the policy is covered only for owner driver of the insured vehicle. Ie. the vehicle was driven by a person non other than the Registered owner of the vehicle   at the accidental time.  Here, deceased Muhammed Rashid was driven the vehicle admitted by Pw1 also.  So the complainants are not entitled to get the policy claim benefit.  As per rule 3 of Motor Vehicle Act, no one can drive a motor vehicle in a public place without a valid driving license.  Here the driving license of the deceased is not submitted which means he did have valid driving license at the time of Accident which is a violation of rule 3 of Motor Vehicle Act.  Further as per Sec.3 of Ext.B1 policy the personal accident cover is to owner-cum driver.  As per sect.3, the owner-driver is the registered owner of the vehicle insured; owner-driver is the insured named in the policy.  The owner-driver holds an effective license. 

            Here, the owner was not the driver at the time of accident.  Hence as per the terms of the policy the deceased is not covered as the insured was not the driver.  Similar position was decided by our appellate commission Hon’ble SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram in United India Insurance Co.Ltd. Vs.Radhakrishnan II(2011)CPJ290.  The learned counsel of complainant submitted judgment.  But the positions in the said case are not similar with the instant case.

Considering all aspects and as per the terms and conditions, Rule 3 of Motor Vehicle Act and Sec.3 in Ext.B1, policy, the complainants in this case are not entitled to get claim amount.

            In the result complaint is dismissed.  No order as to cost.

Exts.

A1- Copy of FIR in crime No.442/23  of Balussery Police station

A2-Copy of death of certificate of muhammed Rashid.

A3-Copy of family membership certificate issued by Chembilod Village.

A4-Policy certificate

A5- Lawyer notice

A6-Acknowledgment card

B1- Policy certificate

Pw1- Abdurahiman N K- Complainant

       Sd/                                                                              Sd/                                                       Sd/

PRESIDENT                                                                  MEMBER                                         MEMBER

Ravi Susha                                                            Molykutty Mathew                                   Sajeesh K.P

 (mnp)

                                                /Forward by order/

 

 

                                             Assistant Registrar

 

 
 
[HON'BLE MRS. RAVI SUSHA]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[HON'BLE MRS. Moly Kutty Mathew]
MEMBER
 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Sajeesh. K.P]
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.