Per Shri S.R. Khanzode – Hon’ble Presiding Judicial Member: (1) This appeal takes an exception to an order dated 10.12.2009 passed in Consumer Complaint No.384/2009, Sitaram Shripatrao Shinde V/s. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. & Anr., by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Satara (‘Forum below’ in short). At the outset, it may be stated that complaint was not admitted as against Respondent/Opposite Party No.1 – New India Assurance Co. Ltd. and notice after admission was issued only against Respondent No.2 – State Bank of India, hereinafter referred to as ‘Bank’. The appeal was admitted and heard forthwith with the consent of both the parties. (2) The controversy is very limited. For his car Indigo Lx, bearing registration No.MH-11-Y-1699, the Appellant/Complainant hereinafter referred to as the ‘Complainant’, had taken insurance policy from the Opposite Party No.1 Insurance Company for the period 06.05.2008 to 05.05.2009. However said policy stood cancelled since the cheque for payment of premium was not honoured by the Bank. Insurance Company informed said fact to the insured, i.e. the Complainant by its letter dated 14.05.2008. The car met with an accident on 17.11.2008, Insurance claim was made, but, it stood repudiated giving reference to the earlier letter dated 14.05.2008 stating that on the date of accident there was no valid and effective insurance policy. Feeling aggrieved thereby this consumer complaint was filed. Said consumer complaint stood dismissed by impugned order and feeling aggrieved thereby this appeal is preferred by original Complainant. (3) We heard Mr.Milind Oak, Advocate for the Appellant and Mr.Anand Patwardhan, Advocate for the Respondent No.2. (4) It can be seen that while sending the repudiation letter dated 27.01.2009, the insurance company also referred to their earlier communication dated 14.05.2008 which was sent by registered post acknowledgement due to the Complainant whereby dishonour of the cheque issued for premium was intimated to the Complainant by the Insurance Company. In spite of such submission while filing consumer complaint and even in a supporting affidavit, it is not denied by the Complainant that he did not receive communication dated 14.05.2008 from the Insurance Company intimating him about the dishonor of the cheque for premium and consequent cancellation of the policy. Only in rejoinder filed by the Complainant he made a statement that it had not received said letter, but, such statement is not supported by any affidavit. Therefore, considering the conduct of the Complainant not to make any statement about receipt or non-receipt of the letter dated 14.05.2008 and thereby not denying the receipt thereof, supra, it must be presumed considering preponderance of probabilities that denial of receipt of such letter in a rejoinder is an after thought by the Complainant and as such cannot be relied upon. (5) Such dishonour of cheque since intimated by the Insurance Company to the Complainant immediately and since it is the Complainant who failed to pay the premium even within the grace period available, then the Complainant should blame himself for lapse of the Insurance policy. Therefore, when the accident occurred, since there was no valid and effective insurance policy, the insurance claim stood repudiated. In view of above referred intimation given, the Complainant cannot blame the Bank for the dishonor of the cheque in spite of sufficient balance and subsequent cancellation of the Insurance policy. Therefore, we find no fault with the impugned order dismissing the consumer complaint. Thus, finding the appeal devoid of any substance, we pass the following order: O R D E R (i) Appeal stands dismissed. (ii) However, in the given circumstances no order as to costs. |
