Haryana

Ambala

CC/382/2016

A.K. Chauhan - Complainant(s)

Versus

The New India Assurance Co Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Ashwani Bhandari

23 Feb 2018

ORDER

BEFORE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, AMBALA.

                                                        Complaint No. 382 of 2016

                                                        Date of instt:  14.10.2016

                                                        Date of decision: 23.02.2018

                                        

A.K.Chauhan son of Shri Madho Ram Chauhan, resident of House No.23, Sector-A, Defence Colony, Ambala Cantt.

                                        ...Complainant.

Versus

1. The New India Assurance Company Limited through its authorized signatory Head Office New India Insurance Building 87 Mahatama Gandhi Ram, Mumbai.
2. The New India Insurance Company Limited, through its Manager, GT Road Opposite Bus Stand, Karnal.
3. Kanav Motor Pvt. Limited village Tepla, Ambala Jagadhri Road, Ambala Cantt.

                                                                        …Opposite parties.

Complaint under section 12 of

 

BEFORE:  SH. DINA NATH ARORA, PRESIDENT.  

                SH. PUSHPENDER KUMAR, MEMBER

                   MS. ANAMIKA GUPTA, MEMBER                 

 

Present: -  Sh.Ashawani Bharwaj, Adv. for complainant.

                Sh.J.S.Rathore, Adv. for OP Nos.1 & 2.

                Sh.Keshav Sharma, Adv. for OP No.3.

 

ORDER

 

                Brief facts of the present complaint are that on 06.07.2016 the complainant had purchased a Eco Sport Ford bearing Engine/Chasis No.09064 Model 2016 from OP No.3 and got the same insured with Op No.2 vide note No.656897 having validity from 06.07.2016 to 05.07.2017 by paying a sum of Rs.19626/- as premium.  On 06.08.2016, vehicle of the complainant met with an accident and intimation regarding this was sent to Op No.3 and the car was also handedover to it. Surveyor appointed by the OPs prepared an estimate to the tune of Rs.1,15,000/- for repairing of the said car. Op No.3 repaired the car and demanded a sum of Rs.93,000/- which the complainant had paid. Thereafter, the complainant submitted all the necessary bills and documents to the OPs including RC etc. but the Op No.2 repudiated the claim on the ground that Temporary Chit was valid upto 04.08.2016 whereas the date of accident is 06.08.2016. The complainant requested the OP No.2 several times to pay the above said amount of Rs.93,000/- and further served legal notice upon it but to no avail. The act and conduct of the OPs clear cut deficiency in service. In evidence, the complainant has tendered affidavit Annexure CX and documents Annexure C1 to Annexure C14.

2.             On notice OPs appeared and contested the complaint by filing separate replies. OP Nos. 1 & 2 in their joint reply have taken preliminary objections such as concealment of material facts, maintainability and jurisdiction etc.  There was no privity of contract of insurance between the owner of the car and the OPs at the date and time of alleged accident covering such type of claims and risks.  On the date of accident the complainant was not having any RC of the car and temporary chit was valid upto 04.08.2016 and the insured had submitted tax receipt dated 10.0.2016 which shows that at the time of accident he was not having RC, therefore question of submitting the RC does not arise at all.  The repudiation made by the insurance company is justified because there was breach of terms and conditions of insurance policy and even using of vehicle on public road without any registration is an offence under Section 192 of MV Act. Other contentions have been controverted and prayer for dismissal of the complaint has been made.  

3.                          OP No.3 in its reply has submitted that there is no deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on its part.  Further submitted that the vehicle was not registered, therefore, the insurance company has not passed the claim and the repair of accidental vehicle was got done on payment basis and after making the necessary repairs vehicle was delivered to the complainant upto his entire satisfaction without any further claim. The chit was valid upto 04.08.2016 and accident had taken place on 06.08.2016, therefore, the complainant is not entitled for any relief etc. In evidence the OPs have tendered affidavit Annexure RX and document Annexure R1.

4.                     We have gone through the case file with the assistance of the counsel for the parties.

5.                     It is not disputed that the accident had occurred during the subsistence of the policy and the vehicle has been got repaired from OP No.3 on payment basis. The complainant has come with the plea that the rejection of his claim by the insurance company is illegal because there was no violation of terms and conditions of the policy as well as provisions of MV Act. In support his contentions he placed reliance of case law titled as National Insurance Co.Lted. Vs. Daya Chand ana another 2015 (ACJ) 2592 P& Haryana High Court.  He further argued that the insurance company has failed to produce the copy of terms and conditions qua exclusion of liability and there can be no automatic presumption that violation of provisions of Motor Vehicle Act would amount to violation of terms of contract and the liability of the insurance company is driven through contractual obligation. On the other hand the ground of the OPs/insurance company for rejection of the claim of the complainant is that at the time of accident on 06.08.2016 the vehicle was not registered as the temporary chit was expired on 04.08.2016.  It is proved on the case file that the complainant had applied for permanent registration certificate on 10.08.2016 (Annexure C10). No doubt as per the Annexure C-18 receipt in token of the documents qua permanent registration of the vehicle was issued by Registration Authority which was valid upto 10.09.2016. It is established on the case file that the vehicle was not registered on the day of accident on 06.08.2016 and the complainant has failed to explain as to why he has not taken steps for getting the same registered within stipulated period which makes him disentitle for the claim lodged with the insurance company and the claim has rightly been repudiated by the insurance keeping in view the breach of policy conditions as well as provision of Section 39 and 43 of MV Act by the complainant. Hon’ble National Commission in case titled as Oriental Insurance Company Vs. Vikram Kanda 2016 (4) CLT has observed that registration of the vehicle is mandatory requirement of law to drive the vehicle on any place or any other place and if there was any violation of Section 39 of the Motor Vehicle Act the insurance company has a right to repudiate the claim on this ground.  On this point Haryana State Commission in a recent judgment United India Insurance Company Limited & Anr. Vs. Vinod Kumar & Anr. 2018 (1) CPJ 6 has held that if the vehicle is being driven in violation of MV Act and there is also violation of policy conditions, repudiation made by the insurance company is justified. Hon’ble State Commission has relied upon the Hon’ble Supreme Court judgment, the case title Narinder Singh Vs. New India Assurance Company & Others decided on 04.09.2014 in Civil Appeal No. 8463 of 2014. There is nothing on the case file to say that the Ops have wrongly and illegally repudiated the claim of the complainant. The present case is fully covered by the case laws settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India as mentioned above. As per the Article 141 of the Constitution of India The law declared by the Supreme Court shall be binding on all courts within the territory of India.  Counsel for the complainant relied upon the judgment delivered by the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in case titled NIC Vs. Daya Chand (supra) is not helpful to the complainant. Accordingly, the complaint is liable to be dismissed, same is hereby dismissed. There is no order as to costs. Copy of the order be sent to the parties concerned, free of costs, as per rules. File after due compliance be consigned to record room.

 

 

Announced on: 23.02.2018                        (D.N. ARORA)

                                                                    PRESIDENT

 

                                               

 

                                                               (PUSHPENDER KUMAR)

                                                                    MEMBER

 

 

                                               

                                                             (ANAMIKA GUPTA)

                                                                    MEMBER