Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rohtak.

                                                                   Complaint No. : 295

                                                                   Instituted on     : 03.07.2018

                                                                   Decided on      :  20.02.2024.

Dalbir Singh s/o Sh. Tara Chand R/o VPO Badesra, District Bhiwani and presently residing at quarter number 340 PTC SunarianRohtak 124001.

                                                                             ………..Complainant.

                                                Vs.

TheNew India Assurance Company Ltd. Through its Branch Manager 313, Model Town, Delhi Road, Rohtak.

…….Respondent/Opposite party.

                    COMPLAINT U/S 35 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT

BEFORE:  SH.NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT.

                   DR. TRIPTI PANNU, MEMBER.

                   DR.VIJENDER SINGH, MEMBER

Present:       Sh. Dinesh Singla, Advocate for the complainant.

                   Sh.R.K.Bhardwaj, Advocate for the opposite party.

                                      ORDER

NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT:

1.                Brief facts of the case as per the complainant are that he had purchased a car Datsun Go bearing no.HR-19J-4611 on 13.02.2018 from Rahuls/o Sh. Jai Bhagwan  and applied for transfer of ownership on same date . The said car was duly insured with the opposite party vide policy no.35380031170100014660 for the period 09.02.2018 to 08.02.2019. After the transfer of ownership, complainant applied to respondent for mentioning his name in insurance policy and completed all the formalities but insurance company flatly denied the same without any substantive reason. On 23.03.2018 when the complainant was coming to Rohtak and near RKP Public School, Hisar Road Rohtak, suddenly a cow came on the road in front of his car, due to which complainant lost his balance and accident took place. Due to the said accident the above said car got completely damaged. Complainant informed the oppositeparty  immediately. The opposite party appointed surveyor and vehicle was surveyed. The complainant took the said vehicle for repairing and the mechanic told that the vehicle was under total loss and the estimated cost for repairing was Rs.450000/-. Complainant approached the opposite party and completed all the required formalities and requested the opposite party to pay the amount of claim but despite repeated requests of the complainant, claim has not been paid to the complainant.  Lastly the opposite party denied to approve the claim on the ground that insurance is not in the name of complainant. The act of opposite party is illegal and amounts to deficiency in service. Hence this complaint and it is prayed that opposite party may kindly be directed to pay the claim amount of Rs.450000/- alongwith interest, compensation and litigation expenses to the complainant as explained in relief clause.

2.                After registration of complaint, notice was issued to the opposite party. Opposite party appeared and filed its written reply submitting therein that owner of vehicle no.HR-19J-4611 was Rahul s/o Sh. Jai Bhagwan. He sold the vehicle to Sh. Dalbir Singh and the RCof the said vehicle was transferred on date 06.02.2018 and the date of loss is 23.03.2018. Thus at the time of accident the registered owner of the said vehicle was Sh. Dalbir Singh and the insurance certificate was in the name of the owner Mr. Rahul. Thus there is no contract between Sh. Dalbir Singh and the insurance company. Dalbir Singh is the stranger person to the insurance company. There is violation of terms and conditions of the insurance policy and therefore the claim is not payable.  It is further submitted that after transfer of RC, it is the duty of the present owner or as well as the previous owner to give an application to the insurance company within 14 days to change the name of previous owner and mention the name of the present owner in the insurance policy which was not done. Thus there is violation of terms and conditions of the insurance policy and insurance company is not liable to pay any claim to the complainant. It is also submitted that the loss took place on dated 23.03.2018 and the intimation to the insurance company was given on 04.04.2018. Thus there is a violation of terms and conditions of the insurance policy and the insurance company is not liable to pay any claim to the complainant.  Sh. Rupin Thakkar was appointed as surveyor and loss assessor who assessed the loss of Rs.188564/- (after applying all the applicable deductibles including salvage value). But the complainant has no insurable interest in the vehicle in question. Hence opposite party is not liable to pay the claim amount to the complainant. All the other contents of the complaint were stated to be wrong and denied and opposite party prayed for dismissal of complaint with costs. 

3.                Ld. counsel for the complainant in his evidence has tendered affidavit Ex.CW1/A, documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C8  and closed his evidence on 30.11.2023. Ld. Counsel for opposite party has tendered affidavit Ex.RW1/A, Ex.RW2/A, documents Ex.R1 to Ex.R5 and closed his evidence on 21.09.2022. 4.               We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through material aspects of the case very carefully.

5.                In the present case the complainant has pleaded that he purchased the vehicle in question from Rahul s/o Sh. Jai Bhagwan and deposited the transfer fee with the registration authority for the ownership of the vehicle on 13.02.2018. He further submitted that the vehicle met with an accident on 23.03.2018 and he informed the respondent officials just after the accident. The claim of the complainant has been repudiated and closed as ‘No Claim’ vide letter dated 05.06.2018 which is placed on record as Ex.R3 on the ground that the insurance policy is in the name of previous owner i.e. Rahul.  So as per GR 17 the complainant has no insurable interest at the time of accident. Respondent has further submitted that the registration certificate of the vehicle bearing registration No.HR19J4611 has been transferred in the name of complainant on 06.02.2018 and date of loss is 23.03.2018. The insurance company further submitted that at the time of accident the registered owner of the vehicle is Dalbir Singh i.e. complainant and the insurance certificate is in the name of previous owner namely Rahul. So the complainant has no insurable interest in the vehicle in question. As such claim has been repudiated. We have minutely perused the documents placed on record by both the parties. As per document Ex.C2 dated 13.02.2018 an amount of Rs.500/- has been deposited with the Govt. Of Haryana Transport Department Rohtak for smart Card fee and for transfer of ownership. Meaning thereby a wrong plea has been taken by the insurance company that vehicle has been transferred in the name of complainant on 06.02.2018. Moreover we have also perused the insurance certificate Ex.C4. This certificate has been issued for the period 09.02.2018 to 08.02.2019. If we admit the plea of insurance company that the vehicle has been transferred in the name of complainant on dated 06.02.2018 then why this certificate Ex.C4 was issued in the name of previous owner i.e. Mr. Rahul.  So we have believed the contention pleaded by the complainant that the transfer fee was deposited on 13.02.2018 and thereafter the vehicle was transferred in the name of complainant. Moreover one another document was placed on record as Ex.C7. Through this document the previous owner moved an application on 19.02.2018 with the insurance company with the plea that the insurance certificate be transferred in the name of complainant.We have also perused the authority submitted by ld. Counsel for the complainant in Civil appeal No.2632 of 2020  of Hon’ble Supreme court of India titled as Surendra Kumar Bhilawe Vs. New India Assurance Company Limiteddecided on 18.06.2020 whereby Hon’ble Supreme Court  has held that: “Certificate of insurance is deemed to be transferred in favour of transferee of vehicle with transfer of vehicle”. In view of the law cited above which is fully applicable on the facts and circumstances of the case, it is observed that repudiation of claim on this ground is illegal and amounts to deficiency in service. As such opposite party is liable to pay the claim amount to the complainant.  As  per survey report the surveyor has assessed the loss of Rs.195564/- but as per written statement it is submitted that the surveyor has assessed the loss of Rs.188564/-(after applying all the applicable deductibles including salvage value).  Hence the complainant is entitled for Rs.188564/-. 

6.                In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, we hereby allow the complaint and direct the opposite party to pay Rs.188564/-(Rupees one lac eighty eight thousand five hundred and sixty four only) alongwith interest @ 9% from the date of filing the present complaint i.e.03.07.2018 till its realisation and, also to pay Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand only) as compensation on account of deficiency in service and Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand only) as litigation expenses to the complainant  within one month from the date of decision.

7.                Copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced in open court:

20.02.2024.

                                                          .....................................................

                                                          Nagender Singh Kadian, President

                                                          ..........................................

                                                          TriptiPannu, Member.

                                                          ..........................................

                                                          Vijender Singh, Member.