BEFORE THE A.P. STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

AT HYDERABAD.

FA 575 of 2011 against CC  137/2010, Dist. Forum, Mahaboobnagar

Between:

Mohd. Khaja

S/o. Shaik Dawood

R/o. Komatikunta Village

Lingal Mandal

Mahaboobnagar Dist.                                  ***                         Appellant/                                                                                                            Complainant

And

The New India Assurance Company Ltd.

Rep. by its Branch Manager

Branch Office , Opp. Modern High School

Mahaboobnagar Dist.                                  ***                         Respondent/

                                                                                                Opposite Party

Counsel for the Appellant:                          M/s. K. Sudharshan

Counsel for the Resp:                                 M/s.  S. Raj Kumar

CORAM:

                              SMT. M. SHREESHA, PRESIDING MEMBER

&

                             SRI  S. BHUJANGA RAO, MEMBER

FRIDAY, THE  TWENTY SIXTH  DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND THIRTEEN

ORAL ORDER:  (Per Smt. M. Shreesha, Member)

***

1)                Aggrieved by the order in C.C. No. 137/2010 on the file of Dist. Forum, Mahaboobnagar, the  complainant preferred this appeal.

2)                The brief facts as set out in the complaint are that he being the owner of the  tractor and trailer bearing No. AP-22 K 6881  and 6882  got it insured with the respondent insurance company covering the period from 19.9.2008 to 18.9.2009.  While so, on 25.1.2009 at about 12.00 noon near Pedda Moori in the limits of  Madapur of Lingal Mandal  it met with an accident wherein the vehicle was extensively damaged.    The police registered the case  in Crime No. 10/2009 u/s 337 and 338  IPC  and investigated into the matter.  The complainant submits that at the time of accident the tractor and trailer were in good condition and the driver was having valid and effective driving license  and  was eking out his livelihood  by plying the tractor trailer.    He got the vehicle repaired  by incurring in all an amount of Rs. 1,48,500/-.    Later he lodged a  claim with the opposite party for refund of  the amount incurred by him towards repair  but there was no reply from the insurance company.    The complainant  got issued a legal notice for which  the opposite party sent a letter stating that the complainant did not submit  required documents and as such the claim was closed.   The complainant denied receipt of any notice from the  opposite party.    Hence this complaint for a direction to the opposite party to pay Rs. 1,48,500/- towards the expenditure incurred by him together with compensation and costs.

3)                The respondent/opposite party insurance company filed written version denying the allegations made by the complainant.   The opposite party submitted that on receipt of claim form along with documents submitted by the complainant, they addressed a letter dt.  18.2.2009 to submit certain important/necessary  documents, however, the complainant failed to submit the same and  as such the claim was closed as “No Claim”.   The opposite party sent a letter dt.  18.2.2009 to submit driving license, RC Book, fitness certificate, bills of repair, cash memo  and re-inspection of  repaired vehicle by the surveyor  but the complainant failed to submit the same.  As per  the  Motor  Final Survey  Report  the  actual loss  sustained by the  complainant is Rs. 7,621/-.  There is no deficiency in service on their  behalf and therefore prayed for dismissal of the complaint. 

4)                The Dist. Forum based on the evidence adduced i.e., Exs. A1 to A13 and Ex. B1   to Exs. B9 and the pleadings put forward the Dist. Forum dismissed the complaint. 

5)                Aggrieved by the said order, the  complainant preferred this appeal.

6)                The facts not in dispute are  that the appellant/complainant purchased a tractor  & trailer which were  insured with the  opposite party from   19.9.2008  to 18.9.2009 evidenced under Ex. A1.  Ex. A1 is also  Motor Claim Form  given by the  insured to the opposite party stating that the accident had taken place  on 25.1.2009   at Pedda Moori in the limits of Madapur  of Lingala Mandal and the tractor and trailer  turned turtle  and the vehicle was damaged.   The complainant submits that  he incurred  an amount of Rs. 1,000/- towards toeing charges from  Madapur  to Nagarkurnool and spent an amount of Rs. 1,10,000/- towards  spare parts and repairs.    Ex. A3 is the certificate of registration of the said vehicle which is valid from 27.5.2006  to  26.5.2021.  Ex. A5 is the  certificate of insurance issued by  the opposite party in the name of the complainant for IDV of Rs. 3,85,074/- and the period of insurance is mentioned  as  19.9.2008 to 18.9.2009.   Ex. A6 is  the FIR  and  Crime Details Form stating  the  date and the nature of  accident.   Ex. A7 is the Pattadar Pass Book  belonging to the complainant evidencing that he is an agriculturist. 

7)                 It is the complainant’s case that  though he filed claim before the opposite party, he did not receive any reply and then he got issued a legal notice  to the opposite party evidenced under Ex. A8 dt. 12.10.2010 but the opposite party has not  replied and sent repudiation letter evidenced under Ex. A10 dt.  13.10.2010 stating that  they have closed the claim  as “No Claim” since the  complainant had failed to submit the required documents.   The complainant once again  vide Ex. A11 issued a reply  to the opposite party stating  that he has submitted all the required documents  and that he  has not received any letter dt. 18.2.2009 which the opposite party is referring to. 

8)                 It is the case of the insurance company that  the opposite party  had repudiated the claim since the complainant did not respond to their letter dt. 18.2.2009 calling upon the complainant to submit driving license, RC Book, fitness certificate, bills of repair, cash memo etc.  Therefore the surveyor assessed the loss at Rs.  7,621/- only. 

9)                 A perusal of the record shows that  the complainant has lodged FIR  and has filed copy of the FIR report  and Ex. B1  which is the surveyor report  evidencing that the surveyor had checked the driving license of the insured which he has referred to in his report and has also stated  the details  of the accident.    It is not as if the complainant did not make  any claim.    He has made the claim evidenced under  Ex. B3/A1 and the opposite party had  an opportunity to go through  Ex. B7 & B8 which are FIR and crime details form.    It is the case of the  opposite party that though they had issued a letter dt. 18.2.2009 calling for certain documents  which the complainant has not furnished.    It is the case of the complainant  that he has not received such  letter.    We observe from the record that the opposite party did not file copy of the letter  sent  nor the postal acknowledgement  to substantiate their case that they have despatched this letter to the complainant and  the complainant did not furnish  the said documents.    It is not in dispute that the claim was made and a surveyor was also deputed who assessed the loss  at Rs. 7,621/-  evidenced under Ex. B1.  The complainant though filed an estimate  for Rs.  72,380/- from M/s. Shukur  Automotives, Nagarkurnool did not substantiate it by producing  the receipts or  any mode of payment  by which  amount was paid to the service mechanic who has repaired  his tractor  & trailer.   While  we observe  that the repudiation of  claim by the insurance company is  unjustified  and amounts to deficiency of service and as the complainant  had established that the tractor was damaged in an accident  and FIR was lodged and there is no evidence that  the complainant has received letter dt. 18.2.2009, we are of the considered view   that  equally the complainant  has not established by way of receipts or repair bills  that he has spent  an amount of Rs. 1,48,500/-.    The surveyor has noted in his report  that  the insured has produced an  estimate of Rs. 72,380/- from  M/s. Shukur Automotives,  Nagarkurnool towards repairs  and replacements and after deducting depreciation, salvage and policy excess  has arrived at net loss  at Rs. 7,621/-.    In the absence of repair bills and receipts  filed by the complainant, we rely  on the survey report  and award an amount of Rs. 7,621/-  to be paid by the opposite party to the complainant with interest @  9% p.a., from the date of repudiation till the date of realization.  We are also inclined to award  a compensation of Rs. 5,000/- for the delay in settling the claim of the complainant as he is an agriculturist plying his tractor & trailer  for agricultural purposes.   We also award costs of Rs. 5,000/-.

10)               In the result  this  appeal is  allowed setting aside the order of the Dist. Forum.  Consequently the complaint is allowed in part  directing the insurance company to pay Rs. 7,621/- to the complainant with interest @ 9% p.a., from the date of repudiation till the date of payment together with compensation of Rs. 5,000/- and costs of Rs. 5,000/-.   Time for compliance four weeks. 

1)      _______________________________

PRESIDING MEMBER 

2)           ________________________________

MEMBER  

26/04/2013

*pnr

UP LOAD – O.K