DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-II
Udyog Sadan, C-22 & 23, Qutub Institutional Area
(Behind Qutub Hotel), New Delhi- 110016
Case No.84/2012
Mrs. Asha Verma
Wife of Shri Dev Verma
R/o J-3, Main Road,
Khirki, Opp. Malviya Nagar,
New Delhi
….Complainant
Versus
The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.
D.O. -25,
GA House Khas Market,
New Delhi-110016
Through its Divisional Manager
The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.
Regd. Head Office
A-25/27,
Asaf Ali Road, New Delhi
Through its Managing Director
….Opposite Parties
Date of Institution : 12.03.2012
Date of Order : 11.05.2022
Coram:
Ms. Monika A Srivastava, President
Ms. Kiran Kaushal, Member
Sh. U.K. Tyagi, Member
ORDER
Member: Sh. U.K Tyagi
- Complainant has requested for allowing the refund a sum of Rs.3,30,000/- towards insured amount along with interest @18% per annum from OP; to pay a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- as compensation towards mental agony, harassment deficiency in service; and to pay a sum of Rs.11,000/- as litigation cost.
- The facts leading to the case are that the Complainant is a registered owner of vehicle bearing No. DL-8 CM-0055, engine No. 601753, make/model Skoda Octiva 01.09.2002. The above said vehicle was got insured with the Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd (hereinafter referred to as OP) vide policy No. 215200/31/2010/5765 valid from 19.03.2010 to 18.03.2011. It was averred that the said vehicle caught fire on 17.03.2011 at 7:00 PM Ghilor Kanhi Road, Near Jasia Miner due to sudden fire and got completely burnt/damaged. At the time of incident, the vehicle was being driven by Sh. Parveen Kumar accompanied by Sh. Yogesh Huda. The driver was having valid licence. Fire brigade was also called and the fire was got extinguished. Complaint was lodged with Police Station - Ghilor vide D.D No. 26, dated 18.03.2011. The information relating to incident was also given to the OP. The OP thereafter, appointed surveyor viz. Shushil Kumar Sharma. To this effect, the surveyor gave report stating that vehicle was got completely damaged due to fire. The Complainant also lodged its claim with OPs and also completed all necessary formalities. The OP denied the claim stating that the Complainant has already sold the said vehicle to someone. It is also alleged that the OPs with the connivance of surveyor, have forged some documents just to avoid the liability.
- The OP, on the other hand, vide its written reply, took certain preliminary objection stating therein that the complaint has not approached this Commission with clean hands. The Complainant has transferred the said vehicle to Sh. Yogesh Huda in April, 2010, much prior to taking insurance cover as admitted by herself in a number of documents such as certificate issued on 04.10.2011, as per Police Report No.26 dated 18.03.2011 with Police Station, Ghilor, Fire Services Report dated 17.03.2011 and Surveyor’s Reports dated 18.03.2011. However, the insured never applied to the OP for transfer of insurance policy, which is mandatory u/s 31 of the Motor Vehicles Act to have been completed within 14 days of transfer of the vehicle. Failure to do so entails penal provisions. As such, there is no privity of contract between Sh. Yogesh & OP. There is no insurable interest in the said vehicle. Hence, claim was rightly repudiated & not liable to pay the insured amount. It has been so held in M/s Complete Insulations (P) Ltd. Vs New India Assurance Company Ltd reported at 1996 SCC (I) 221 wherein moot question involved in the case was whether on the facts of the said case, without the Insurance Policy being transferred in the name of transferee, he was entitled to be indemnified by the insurer. The OP also vehemently denied most of the averments.
4. Both the parties filed Written Submission and evidences by way of affidavit. Rejoinder is on record so is the Written Statement. Arguments were heard & concluded.
5. This Commission has gone into entire gamut of issues raised by the OP as well as Complainant. We have seen the documents mentioned above minutely. All the documents viz- certificate issued by the Complainant on 04.10.2011, copy of the Police Report No. 26 dated 18.03.2011 with Police Station, Ghilor, Fire Services Report dated 17.03.2011 and Surveyor’s Report indicate that the subject vehicle stand transferred in the name of Sh. Yogesh Hudda much prior to the fire-incident related to said vehicle. The vehicle was in use, power, possession control of the transferee, i.e Sh. Yogesh Huda, at the time of accident. Sh. Yogesh was in car of the time of incident. Therefore, circumstantial evidence also suggest that Complainant was no longer the owner of the vehicle in question has no insurable interest, hence, OP is not liable to indemnify.
6. The Commission also examined the Report of Surveyor relevant part of which is produced:-
“As per Police Report, it seems that the owner of insurer Vehicle is Sh. Yogesh S/o Sat Narain, Rohtak but as per R.C of the insured vehicle, owner of the vehicle is Smt Asha Verma.”
7. All these documents bear testimony to this effect that the vehicle was got transferred to Sh. Yogesh. The Insurance Policy was in the name of Smt. Asha Verma proprietor of the said vehicle at one stage. There is no privity of contract between Sh. Yogesh and OP. Therefore, question does not arise to entertain the claim as contended by OP all through its Written Argument etc. As such, the Complainant has no insurable interest as elaborated above.
8. In view of the facts and circumstances in the case as narrated above, and having placed reliance on the above noted judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court, this Commission is of conscious view that there is no negligence and deficiency in service on the part of OP. Rather it seems that the Complainant has not come to this Commission with clean hands. Therefore, the claim of the Complainant is rejected.
No order as to cost.
File be consigned to the record room after giving a copy of the order to the parties as per rules. Order be uploaded on the website.
