Karnataka

Chitradurga

CC/642/2019

Sri Nagesh.T, S/o Thimmanna, - Complainant(s)

Versus

The New India Assurance Co.Ltd., Reptd.by its Branch Manager, - Opp.Party(s)

Sri R.N.Parthalinga

30 May 2023

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHITRADURGA.

CC.NO:642/2019

DATED:30/05/2023

PRESENT: Kum. H.N. MEENA, B.A., LL.B., PRESIDENT

                Smt. B.H. YASHODA, B.A., LL.B., LADY MEMBER                          Sri. H.JANARDHAN, B.A.L., LL.B., MEMBER  

 

……COMPLAINANT/S	Sri Nagesh.T S/o Thimmanna, Owner of Vehicle Bearing Reg.No.KA-16/-9878, R/o Chitranayakanahalli Village, Challakere Taluk, Chitradurga District.   (Rep.By Sri.R.N.Parthalinga, Advocate)
V/S
.….OPPOSITE PARTY/S	The New Indian Assurance Co.Ltd., Represented by its Branch Manager, The New India Assurance Co. Ltd., P.B. Road, Opp.Jagaluru Mahalingappa Towers, Chitradurga Town.   (Rep.By Sri.P. Nanjundappa, Advocate)

 

:JUDGEMENT:

 

Order delivered by Hon’ble President, Kum. H.N. MEENA.

 

The complainant has filed this complaint under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 for seeking the reliefs to direct the opposite party to settle the claim of complainant under the damage loss as per bill of Rs.4,27,925/- + toeing charges of Rs.5,000/-. And Rs.1,00,000/- towards mental agony, cost of complainant till date sustained by the complainant  and other reliefs deems fit under circumstances of the case by allowing complaint in the interest of justice.

 

 

2. The brief facts of the complaint:

The complainant is the RC owner of Mahindra LGV vehicle bearing Reg. No:KA-16/C-9878 and the said vehicle has been purchased in the month of June 2016 from Mahindra Motors for his livelihood and also to look after the family necessities from the income of the vehicle itself. and the said vehicle has been insured with the opponent under vide policy No.68050231170300009299 for the period 01/01/2018 to 31/12/2018 covering third party risk unlimited, P.A. for owner cum driver for an amount of Rs.2,00,000/-and also covering own damage of the vehicle for an amount of Rs.6,07,438/-

 

 

3. Complainant further submits that on 28/07/2018 at about 1:50.pm the said vehicle met with accident near C.B.Forest, Kallambella Hobli, Tumkur District, at the same time the driver Lakshmana Reddy S/o Hanumantha Reddy of the vehicle has lost the control of the said vehicle was toppled down and in the said accident the complainant’s vehicle was entirely damaged due to the accident. Thereafter, the complainant has intimated the OP insurance company through telephone regarding the accident and also reported in Kallambella Police Station with Cr.No.0179/2018 dated 10/08/2018 against the driver of the vehicle bearing Reg. No.KA-16/C-9878. As per direction of OP the complainant has intimated the accident of the vehicle in writing, after that OP appointed surveyor and he has visited the place and the surveyor has surveyed the vehicle in accident place and he has stated the complainant to leave the vehicle in any showroom for repair, for that complainant has left his vehicle in Honnasiri Mahindra Motors at Tumkur. After that the complainant has obtained estimation from the said Honnasiri Mahindra Motors at Tumkur, the same was given to the opponent along with RC, Policy, DL, for that OP appointed surveyor then surveyor has visited H.D. Motors Honnasiri Mahindra Motors at Tumkur and he has also verified the records, after that as per the instructions of opponent insurance company and surveyor, the vehicle was repaired and after that for the repair the complainant has incurred Rs.4,27,925/-. After repair the complainant has given the repair bills to the opponent insurance company, even in spite of that, the opponent insurance company has not settled the claim of the complainant.

 

 

 

4. Complainant further stated that, the complainant has visited number of times to the branch office of opponent in Chitradurga and also given entire papers and also estimation papers to the OP for settlement of the claim, but OP has never settled the claim of the complainant. Finally the complainant has issued letter dated 08/07/2019 through RPAD and the same was served to the opponent on 10/07/2019 along with original bill has been attached to the notice. Even in spite of the notice has been served to the OP neither they replied nor they have settled the claim of the complainant. This act and conduct of the OP in not settling the claim of the complainant is without proper reasons and they have made deficiency in service in not settling the claim of the complainant is without proper reasons and they have made deficiency in service in not settling the claim of the complainant. Hence filed this complaint.

 

 

5. This commission after registering this complaint ordered for issuance of notice to opponents, Notice duly served. Opponent appeared through its counsels and filed version.

 

6. The opponent stated in the version that the allegations of the complaint which are not specifically admitted in this version are all here by denied as false. It is admitted that the complainant is the RC owner of the Mahindra LGV vehicle bearing Reg. No:KA-16/C-9878 and the said goods vehicle has been insured with the OP through vide policy No.68050231170300009299, said vehicle met with accident on 28/07/2018 at about 1:50.pm as per police records and the policy is force from 01/01/2018 to 31/12/2018.  The other averments are all hereby denied as false and even though this opponent settled claim of the complainant as per his wish as directly to the repaired by M/s H.D. Motors Tumkur on cash less basis. The insured vehicle bearing No.KA-16/C-9878 is goods carrying commercial vehicle it was damaged in the accident on 28/07/2018 and this OP insurance company issued commercial vehicle for enhancement B-cover only which is Zero depreciation on damaged parts in respect of partial losses payable under normal policy and there not inclusion of IMT-23. Hence complainant claim not covered under IMT-23 parts not covered.

 

7. OP further submits that, the OP received letter on 10^th July 2019 from complainant as per this letter the complainant requested the opponent insurance company for cashless facility and also given consent letter to H.D. Motors Tumkur on 01/01/2019 ensuring that he will pay remaining amount after the Insurance company liability amount to garage. The competent authority of the opponent approved the claim amount of Rs.3,00,998/- which will be company’s liability towards complainant cashless claim and OP sent main to garage and over phone to Financier of the complainant about the company claim liability i.e., Rs.3,00,998/- and financier informed the opponent that in case of total loss they will give NOC and also opponent sent letters dated 06/06/2019 to complainant and to financer and the same this opponent not received reply from complainant side. Later the OP received communication from garage H.D. Motors about the payment of the our Insurance Company liability amount i.e. Rs.3,00,998/- to the garage, since being cashless claim and they have assured opponent insurance company that the difference credit bill receipt will be submitted to opponent and after several communication with garage i.e., H.D. Motors the OP insurance company has disbursed liability amount of Rs.3,00,998/- of the opponent insurance company towards complainant claim to the garage on 02/07/2019.

 

8. This opponent settled the claim amount directly to the repairs of H.D. Motors, Tumkur on cashless basis on the request the complainant himself and he promises to bear the balance amount with repairer on his own. And as such this opponent insurance company has disbursed liability amount of Rs.3,00,998/- of the opponent Insurance company towards complainant claim to the garage on 02/07/2019. OP is already settled the claim amount of the complainant and this complaint is not maintainable with flimsy and untenable grounds without any proper reasons and there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opponent.

 

        9. Complainant and opponent filed their evidence by way of Affidavit, complainant marked as Ex.A-1 to Ex.A-8 and the documents produced by Opponent marked as Ex.B-1 to Ex.B-6 Both complainant and OP filed their written arguments. The Hon’ble commission given an opportunity to both the parties for oral arguments. But there is no representation from both the parties, hence the oral arguments of both the parties are deemed to have been heard.

        10. On the assessment of the above facts, the following points arise for our consideration Viz.

1. Whether the complainant further proves any deficiency of service on the part of OP?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled to reliefs as prayed in the complaint?
3. What order?

 

11. The findings of this commission on the Points for consideration are as below.

Point No.1: In the Negative

Point No.2: In the Negative

Point No.3: As per the final order for the following.

 

REASONS

12. Point No.1 & 2: The allegation made in the complaint, that the complainant is R.C. owner of the Mahindra LGV vehicle bearing Reg. No:KA-16/C-9878 and the said goods vehicle has been insured with the opponent under vide policy No.68050231170300009299 and policy is force from 01/01/2018 to 31/12/2018 the said vehicle met with accident on 28/07/2018 at about 1:50.pm after the said accident the complainant has intimated the accident to the OP insurance company through telephone regarding accident and the said accident has been reported in Kallambella Police Station with Cr.No.0179/2018 dated 10/08/2018 against the driver of the vehicle bearing Reg. No.KA-16/C-9878. As per the instructions of opponent insurance company and surveyor the vehicle was repaired and after that for the repair the complainant has incurred Rs.4,27,925/-. After repair the complainant has given the repair bills to the opponent insurance company, even in spite of that the opponent insurance company has not settled the claim of the complainant.

 

13. In the back ground of above said fact, we perused all the documents produced by the both parties. The complainant side documents are got marked as Ex.A-1 to A-8. That is copy of the policy, FIR, DL and RC of complainant, Invoice Bill, Legal Notice dated 08/07/2019 postal receipt and endorsement these documents  substantiate fact of the case.

 

14. In this regard, we perused the opponent documents that is Ex.B-2, Ex.B-5 and Ex.B-6 it is very clearly shows that the opponent received letters on 10^th July 2019 from complainant. After discussed the competent authority of the opponent approved the claim amount of Rs.3,00,998/- Later the opponent received communication from garage H.D. Motors about the payment of Rs. 3,00,998/- after several communication with garage i.e., H.D. Motors the OP insurance company has disbursed liability amount of Rs. 3,00,998/- of the opponent insurance company towards complainant claim to the garage on 02/07/2019 there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opponent. Hence, the complainant is liable to be dismissed accordingly Point No.1 and 2 are negative.

 

 

15. Point No.3:  In view of the above observation, we proceed to pass the following.

 

 

  

::  ORDER  ::

         The present complaint filed by the complainant Under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act 1986, against the opponents is hereby dismissed.

          Communicate the order to both the parties.

 (Typed directly on the computer to the dictation given to stenographer, the transcript corrected, revised and then pronounced by us on 30^th May 2023.)

 

 

 

 

 

                                                                     Sd/-                                  Sd/-                                  Sd/-

 

-:ANNEXURES:-

 

Witness examined on behalf of Complainant:

PW-1:- Sri Nagesh.T S/o Thimmanna by way of

            Affidavit of evidence.

 

Witness examined behalf of opponent:

DW-1:- Sri Shekraiah S/o Moodalaiah, by way of Affidavit of

            evidence

 

Documents marked on behalf of Complainant:

01	Ex-A-1:-	Certified copy of the Policy
02	Ex-A-2:-	Copy of F.I.R.
03	Ex-A-3:-	True Copy of the RC
04	Ex-A-4:-	True Copy of the DL
05	Ex-A-5:-	True Copy of the HD Motors Tax Invoice
06	Ex-A-6:-	True copy of letter dated 08/07/2019
07	Ex-A-7:-	Postal receipt
08	Ex-A-8:-	Endorsement copy

 

 

 

 

 

Documents marked on behalf of opponent:

 

01	Ex-B-1:-	Consent letter of complainant
02	Ex-B-2:-	Letter written by opponent to complainant on 06/06/2019
03	Ex-B-3:-	Letter written by opponent on 16/07/2019
04	Ex-B-4:-	Acknowledgements
05	Ex-B-5:-	Payment voucher
06	Ex-B-6:-	Payment voucher

 

 

                                                                     Sd/-                                  Sd/-                                  Sd/-

LADY MEMBER               MEMBER                     PRESIDENT

 

 

 

 

 

GM*