BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, MOGA.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Complaint No: 147 of 2007<br /> <br /> Date of Institution: 17.12.2007<br /> <br /> Date of Service:17.01.2008<br /> <br /> Date of Decision:23.05.2008<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Rachhpal Singh (aged 64 years) son of Bachittar Singh, resident of village Nathuwala Jadid, Tehsil & Distt.Moga.<br /> <br /> Complainant.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Versus<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> The New India Assurance Company Limited, Near Gulabi Bagh, G.T.Road, Moga through its Divisional Manager.<br /> <br /> Opposite Party<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Complaint Under Section 12 of the<br /> <br /> Consumer Protection Act, 1986.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Present: Sh.H.S.Lodhi, Adv.counsel for the complainant.<br /> <br /> Sh.Jaswinder Singh,Adv.counsel for the OP.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Quorum: Sh.J.S.Chawla,President.<br /> <br /> Smt.Bhupinder Kaur, Member.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> (J.S.Chawla, President)<br /> <br /> Sh.Rachhpal Singh complainant has filed the present complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (herein-after referred to as ‘Act’) against The New India Assurance Company, Moga, through its Divisional Manager (herein-after referred to as ‘Insurance Company’) directing them to re-imburse the repair and spare charges of truck no.PB-05J-9110 insured with the OP-Insurance Company to the tune of Rs.105530/- and also to pay Rs.50000/- on account of compensation for causing mental tension and harassment besides costs of litigation.<br /> <br /> 2. Briefly stated, Rachhpal Singh complainant got insured his truck bearing registration no.PB-5J-9110, Chassis no.4260Z1KWZ12867 Engine no.30K6229620, Model 2003 with OP-Insurance Company vide policy no. 361100/31/06/01/00004214 for the period w.e.f. 23.11.2006 to 22.11.2007. That on 17.03.2007 at about 7.25 A.M. when son of the complainant namely Jagdev Singh was driving the said vehicle fully loaded with crusher from Pathankot to Moga, the front side tyre of the truck suddenly raptured near Pathankot Chowk Jalandhar resulting into turning of the truck whereby it was materially damaged. Then his son called the agent of OP-Insurance Company Mr.A.S.Sembhi on telephone who deputed Mr.Deepak Gadotra surveyor who assessed the loss to the damaged truck. After inspection and with the consent of the OP-Insurance Company, the damaged vehicle was brought to Kohli Automobiles Moga by hiring crane from Surinder Old Motor Store, Jalandhar. That Kohli Automobiles Moga repaired the vehicle and demanded Rs.105530/- as repair charges. That after the repair of the vehicle in question, again the survey was conducted by Sh.Mangal Singh Surveyor of the OP-Insurance Company. Thereafter, the complainant lodged claim with the OP-Insurance Company and completed all the formalities, but they failed to pay the aforesaid claim to the complainant. That the complainant made various visits in the office of OP-Insurance Company for the payment of the above said amount, but they repudiated his claim on the flimsy ground. Hence the present complaint.<br /> <br /> 3. Notice of the complaint was given to the OP-Insurance Company who appeared through Sh.Jaswinder Singh Advocate and filed their written reply. They took up preliminary objections that the complaint is not maintainable; that the complainant has concealed the material facts from the knowledge of this Forum. In fact at the time of issuance of the policy, the complainant had declared in the proposal form that he was entitled to ‘no claim bonus’ which was duly signed by him. Moreover, at the time of issuance of said policy, the complainant had also provided previous policy dated 7.11.2005 issued by Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Said policy was valid from 25.7.2006 to 6.11.2006. Lateron the OP-Insurance Company has come to know that the complainant was not entitled to ‘no claim bonus’ on renewal as the said policy was originally issued in the name of Janak Raj and Harprit Singh, but lateron it was transferred in the name of Rachhpal Singh complainant. So the complainant was not entitled to ‘no claim bonus’ as reported by Oriental Insurance Company. Thus, the claim of the complainant has rightly been repudiated by the OP-Insurance Company as per the terms and conditions of the proposal form and the insurance policy. On merits, the OP-Insurance Company took the same pleas as taken by them in preliminary objections. All other allegations made in the complaint were specifically denied being incorrect. Hence it was prayed that the complaint filed by the complainant has no merit and the same deserves dismissal.<br /> <br /> 4. In order to prove his case, the complainant tendered in evidence his affidavit Ex.A1, copy of RC Ex.A2, copy of policy Ex.A3, copy of cover note Ex.A4, copy of driving licence Ex.A5, copies of bills Ex.A6 to Ex.A16, copy of repudiation letter Ex.A17 and closed his evidence.<br /> <br /> 5. To rebut the evidence of the complainant, the OP-Insurance Company tendered affidavit Ex.R1 of Sh.Jaswant Rai, Divisional Manager, copy of policy issued by Oriental Insurance Ex.R2, copy of proposal form Ex.R3, copies of letters Ex.R4 and Ex.R5, copies of surveyor reports Ex.R6 and Ex.R7, copy of spot survey report Ex.R8 and closed their evidence.<br /> <br /> 6. We have heard the arguments of Sh.H.S.Lodhi ld. counsel for the complainant and Sh.Jaswinder Singh ld. counsel for the OP-Insurance Company and have very carefully perused the evidence on the file.<br /> <br /> 7. Sh.H.S.Lodhi ld.counsel for the complainant has mainly argued that the OP-Insurance Company has wrongly and illegally repudiated the claim of the complainant to the tune of Rs.105530/- spent on the repair and spare of the vehicle in question. This contention of the ld.counsel for the complainant has full force. Admittedly, the complainant got insured his truck bearing registration no.PB-5J-9110 with OP-Insurance Company for the period w.e.f. 23.11.2006 to 22.11.2007. It is also the admitted case of the parties that on 17.03.2007 at about 7.25 A.M. when son of the complainant namely Jagdev Singh was driving the said vehicle fully loaded with crusher had met with an accident near Pathankot Chowk, Jalandhar. On information given by the complainant, Sh.Deepak Gandotra surveyor was appointed by the OP-Insurance Company. With the consent of the OP-Insurance Company the damaged truck was taken to Kohli Automobiles, Moga for its repair. After repair, Kohli Automobies, Moga issued the bill for Rs.105530/- being the repair and spare charges of the truck in question. After the repair, the truck in question was again inspected by Mangal Singh Engineer, Surveyor, Loss Assessor of the OP-Insurance Company. Sh.Mangal Singh, Engineer, Surveyor, Loss Assessor of the OP-Insurance Company submitted his report Ex.R6 on the file. M/s.Arun Kumar & Co. Surveyors & Loss Assessors gave their report Ex.R7 and they assessed the loss of the vehicle in question to the tune of Rs.105030.94.<br /> <br /> 8. Admittedly, the OPs-Insurance Company had repudiated the claim of the complainant merely on the ground that at the time of getting the vehicle in question insured, he gave wrong information regarding ‘no claim bonus’. The repudiation of the claim of the complainant on the aforesaid ground is illegal and invalid because Rachhpal Singh complainant had purchased the truck in question on 20.7.2006 from Janak Raj etc. Said truck was also insured by Janak Raj etc. the previous owners for the period w.e.f. 7.11.2005 to 6.11.2006 with Oriental Insurance Company. Rachhpal Singh complainant has got the truck in question insured from OP-Insurance company for the period w.e.f. 23.11.2006 to 22.11.2007 and at the time of getting the aforesaid insurance, he got the benefit of ‘no claim bonus’ that no claim was obtained by Janak Raj etc. the previous owners of the truck. So the information given by the complainant was correct and the same has been confirmed by Oriental Insurance Company vide their letter Ex.R5. The only contention of the ld.counsel for the OP-Insurance Company was that because the truck in question was transferred in the name of complainant from Janak Raj etc.during the continuation of the previous policy, the complainant being the purchaser was not entitled to ‘no claim bonus’. This contention of the ld.counsel for the OP-Insurance Company has no merit. It is immaterial if during the continuation of the previous policy, the truck in question was sold by its previous owners Janak Raj etc. to Rachhpal Singh complainant who again got insured the truck from the OP-Insurance Company. But he has not given any wrong information of having obtained the previous claim or by the previous owners Janak Raj etc. Thus, it shows that the OP-Insurance Company has repudiated the claim of the complainant on the technical ground that since the truck was transferred in the name of Rachhpal Singh complainant during the continuation of previous policy, so he was not entitled to ‘no claim bonus’ of the policy in question. The aforesaid breach of condition, if any, was not so fundamental which disentitle the complainant from getting the claim regarding the loss or damage to his vehicle. On this point, the provisions (f) of GR.27 contained in ‘India Motor tariff’ cited by ld.counsel for the OP-Insurance Company do not apply to the facts of the present case. The breach of condition, if any, was not fundamental which disentitle the complainant from getting the claim in question. Except this violation, ld.counsel for the OP-Insurance Company has failed to point out any other violation of the terms and conditions of the policy in question.<br /> <br /> 9. Admittedly, Arun Kumar & Co. Surveyors & Loss Assessors of the company gave their report Ex.R7 of the loss assessed regarding the truck in question to the extent of Rs.105030.94 and we accept their report. The OP-Insurance Company is liable to pay the aforesaid amount of Rs.105030.94 to the complainant being the repair and spare charges of the truck in question. <br /> <br /> 10. To prove his case, the complainant has produced his affidavit Ex.A1, copy of RC Ex.A2, copy of policy Ex.A3, copy of cover note Ex.A4, copy of driving licence Ex.A5, copies of bills Ex.A6 to Ex.A16, copy of repudiation letter Ex.A17. On the other hand, no reliance could be placed on the affidavit Ex.R1 Sh.Jaswant Rai Divisional Manager and other documents Ex.R2 to Ex.R8 and we discard the same.<br /> <br /> 11. The ld. counsel for the parties did not urge or argue any other point before us.<br /> <br /> 12. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the complaint filed by the complainant has merit and the same is accepted. The OP-Insurance Company is directed to pay Rs.105030.94 being the repair and spare charges of truck no.PB-5J-9110. The OP-Insurance Company shall make the aforesaid payment within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order, failing which they shall pay the interest @ 9% per annum on this amount from the date of repudiation of claim Ex.A17 (08.06.2007) till payment. The OP-Insurance Company is also directed to pay Rs.5000/- on account of compensation for mental tension and harassment and Rs.2500/- as cost of litigation to the complainant. Copies of the order be sent to the parties free of cost and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> (Bhupinder Kaur) (J.S.Chawla)<br /> <br /> Member President<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Announced in Open Forum.<br /> <br /> Dated:23.05.2008.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />