View 24222 Cases Against National Insurance
View 7292 Cases Against National Insurance Company
Arjit Chand filed a consumer case on 04 Feb 2015 against The National Insurance Company Ltd in the Gurgaon Consumer Court. The case no is CC/359/2009 and the judgment uploaded on 16 Apr 2015.
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, GURGAON-122001.
Consumer Complaint No.359 of 2009 Date of Institution: 30.04.2009 Date of Decision: 04.02.2015
Arjit Chand son of Shri A.K.Chand, R/o N-278 (FF), Mayfield Gardens, Sector 51, Gurgaon.
……Complainant.
Versus
The National Insurance Company Ltd, SCO No.41,42, 43 Sector 31 Market, Gurgaon through its Divisional Manager
….Opposite party.
Complaint under Sections 12 & 14 of Consumer Protection Act,1986
BEFORE: SH.RAGHVINDER SINGH BAHMANI, PRESIDENT.
SMT JYOTI SIWACH, MEMBER.
Present: Ms. Seema Sharma, Adv for the complainant.
Sh.V.K.Bhardwaj, Adv for the OP
ORDER R.S.BAHMANI, PRESIDENT.
The complainants alleged that he is owner of Maruti Car bearing Regd.No.DL-3-CAJ-1593 and produced copy of Registration Certificate (C-1). The vehicle was duly insured with the OP-Insurance Company vide Policy No.4307505 for the period 22.06.2008 to 21.06.2009 with IDV of Rs.1,30,000/- (C-2). It is alleged that his Car met with an accident on 29.12.2008 and is a case of total damage. OP was informed about the accident. Even Surveyor was appointed who has inspected the Car and reported to the OP about total damage of the Car. He also produced the report of authorized dealer of Maruti i.e. Apra Auto (India) Pvt. Ltd, Sector 14, Gurgaon dated 29.12.2008 of Vehicle No.DL-3-CAJ-1593 of Mr. Arjit Chauhan with 65000 km showing it as a total loss case (C-3). He has filed claim with the OP by complying with all necessary formalities but the OP failed to settle his claim till date without any reason. Even registered Legal Notice dated 23.03.2009 was also given to the OP but of no use (C-4). Thus, it is alleged that the OP is deficient in providing services to the complainant and he is entitled to insured sum of Rs.1,30,000/-. He also claimed compensation of Rs.50,000/- for harassment and mental agony. The complaint is supported with an affidavit and the documents referred above.
2 OP-Insurance Company in its written reply, however, has taken the objection that the complaint is not maintainable before this Forum which is barred by his own act and conduct being premature as they have not repudiated his refund claim as no claim case is still under process. The complainant, infact, has not come to the Forum with clean hands and suppressed the material facts. Infact, he has also violated the terms and conditions of the Insurance Policy as the driver of the insured vehicle was not holding a valid and genuine Driving Licence. Infact, he was disqualified to hold the licence. The complainant has also not got endorsed the factum of installation of CNG for Registration Certificate issued by the Registering Authority though it is mentioned in the Insurance Policy and thus, has violated the terms and conditions of the Policy. He has also failed to explain when the CNG was got installed either before or after the accident or between the accident. The vehicle was inspected by their Surveyor Sh. Dalbari Lal Puri & Sons. Any variation in respect of the insured vehicle has to be got incorporated in the R.C. within 15 days. As per inspection of the vehicle by their Surveyor there were sign of installation of CNG in the vehicle. Admittedly their Surveyor had examined the vehicle in the workshop of Apra Auto India (P) Ltd and his Report is enclosed is (Ann R-1). The written reply is supported with the affidavit of Smt. Geeta Sharma, Divisional Manager of the OP-Company besides document referred above.
3 We have heard the parties and appraised the material on record carefully. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances discussed above and after going through documents produced by the parties on file we are of the considered opinion that vehicle in dispute was owned by complainant Arjit Chand as per Registration Certificate on the date of accident on 29.12.2008 (C-1) and the vehicle was also duly got insured by him vide Policy No.4307505 for the period 22.06.2008 to 21.06.2009 with the OP showing IDV of Rs.1,30,000/- (C-2) which also shows that they have also charged for CNG/LPG Bl-fuel kit Rs.60/- out of the total amount of premium Rs.5176/-. It is also admitted that vehicle has met with an accident and it was a case of total loss as per the report of the authorized dealer of Maruti ie. Apra Auto (India) Pvt. Ltd, Sector 14, Gurgaon dated 29.12.2008 (C-3) which is even accepted by the OP and their Surveyor who has inspected and checked the vehicle. The Report of the Surveyor dated 28.07.2009 with Ref No.08/6298 of Bihari Lal Puri & Sons, New Delhi shows the insurers liability on repair basis as under :-
“We are, thus, of the opinion that it is not at all economical to settle the loss on repair basis as the projected repair liability is working to be over 75 % of the IDV of Rs.1,10,000/- i.e. without the IDV of CNG and is a fit case of total loss.”
Insurers Liability on Total Loss Basis:
Since liability on repair basis was found not to be economical and the assessment on repair basis was found to be exceeding 75 % of the IDV hence it is a case of constructive total loss and as per the terms and conditions of policy of insurance, the insurers are liable to compensate the insured to the extent of the entire sum insured and in the present case the same is Rs.1,10,000/- less Rs.500/- towards excess clause, net amount being Rs.1,09, 500/-. This assessment is without taking into consideration the IDV of CNG of Rs.20,000/- since not fitted in the vehicle at the time of our survey/inspection.
Finally, the Surveyor has assessed the total amount of Rs.1,04,088/- less Salvage value Rs.5000/- and assessed net amount Rs.99,088/-.
As regarding non removal of the CNG from the vehicle is immaterial as he has already paid charges for the Kit as per Insurance Policy (C-2). Thus, it is not case of concealment of true facts when even cause of accident is not fire. Thus, the OP-Insurance Company should have decided the claim of the complainant in a reasonable time and on false pretext they failed to settle his claim and now by their own act and conduct are taking plea of premature filing of the complaint before this Forum and thus, they forced the complainant to run from pillar to post and knocking the door of this forum.
4 Thus, OP is deficient in providing services to the complainant. Hence, complainant is entitled to Rs.99,088.46/- as assessed by the Surveyor in his Report dated 28.07.2009 (Ann R-1) as the Report of Surveyor is an important document and is to be relied upon unless it is contradicted by more credible evidence as held by the Hon’ble National Commission in case New India Assurance Co. Ltd Vs Febama Agencies I(2013) CPJ 133 (NC). The complainant has been harassed by the OP causing mental agony and thus, is entitled to compensation of Rs.10,000/-. He is also entitled to interest @ 9 % p.a. from the date of filing of the complaint till realization. He is also entitled to litigation expenses of Rs.5,000/-.
Compliance be made within 30 days.
Copy of this order be sent to the parties free of costs.
Pronounced in open court.
Dated: 04.02.2015.
President,
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum, Gurgaon
(Jyoti Siwach)
Member
Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes
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.