Punjab

Rupnagar

CC/17/11

Seema Nanda - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Sh. Rajiv Sharma Ghanauli, Adv.

29 Aug 2017

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTT. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ROPAR

                                 Consumer Complaint No. :  11 of 01.03.2017

                                 Date of decision                    :      29.08.2017

 

1. Seema Nanda wife of Late Sh. Brij Mohan Nanda

2.  Deep Nanda, son of Brij Mohan Nanda

3. Pooja

4. Gori both ds/o Brij Mohan Nanda, all residents of New Colony, Shampura, District Ropar   

                                                                 ......Complainant

                                             Versus

1. The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Head Office, A-25/27, SAF Ali Road, New Delhi 110002, through its Managing Director  

2. The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Branch Office, Nangal Chowk Ropar through its Branch Manager.

                                                                               ....Opposite Parties

                                   Complaint under Section 12 of the                                                      Consumer Protection Act, 1986

QUORUM

 

                        MRS. NEENA SANDHU, PRESIDENT

                        SMT. SHAVINDER KAUR, MEMBER

 

ARGUED BY

 

Sh. Rajiv Sharma Ghanauli, Advocate, counsel for complainant 

Sh.H.C.Verma, Adv. counsel for O.P. Nos. 1 & 2

 

ORDER

                                  MRS. NEENA SANDHU, PRESIDENT

The complainants through their counsel has filed this complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) against the Opposite Parties (hereinafter referred to as ‘the O.Ps.’) praying for the following reliefs:-

i)       To pay Rs.19,884, as damages cause to the vehicle of the complainant    

ii)      To pay Rs.20,000/- as compensation for mental agony and physical harassment caused to him

iii)     To pay Rs.10,000/- as litigation expenses.

 

2.               In brief the case of the complainants is that the husband of the complainant No.1 (now deceased) was the owner of Activa having registration No.PB-12-W-4037. On 19.10.2016, the said vehicle met with an accident and was damaged totally. The complainant No. 1, the widow of  Late Sh. Brij Mohan Nanda informed the OPs regarding the accident and also got registered a DDR with the police. As per the instructions of the OPs complainant No.1 took the vehicle for its repair, to the showroom of Sood motors Ghanauli. After its repair, the said sood motors issued a repair bill of Rs. 19884/-. Thereafter, complainant No.1 lodged the claim with the OPs, and also fulfilled all the requisite formalities. Since, the OPs did not release the claim amount, therefore, she got served a legal notice upon the OPs. Thereafter the OPs told her to first get transferred the said vehicle in her name and then lodge the claim. As instructed by the OPs the complainant No. 1 got registered the vehicle in question in her name and lodged the claim with the OPs. But the OPs flatly refused to pay the claim amount.  Hence this compliant.

3.               On being put to the notice, the O.Ps. have filed written version taking preliminary objections; that the complainant has no locus standi to file the present complaint; that this Hon’ble Forum, has no jurisdiction to entertain and try the complaint; that there is no deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps. and the complainants have no cause of action to file the present complaint. On merits it is stated that it is correct that Sh. Brij Mohan S/o Sh. Muni Lal the husband of the compliant No. 1 was the owner of the Activa bearing No. PB12-W-4037 as per the R/C of the vehicle, who died on 02.02.2016, as is evident from the copy of insurance policy. The said scooter had been insured by the company for the period from 13.11.2015 to 12.11.2016, as per the copy of the insurance policy. The complainants have no insurable interest as the policy was in the name of Late Sh. Brij Mohan Nanda S/o Sh. Munni Lal. As per condition No.9 of the terms and conditions of the insurance policy, “in the event of death of sole insured, this policy will not immediately lapse but will remain valid for a period of three months from the date of death of insured or till the expiry of this policy, whichever is earlier. During the said period, legal heirs of the insured may apply to get the policy transferred in their name or to obtain a new insurance policy for the vehicle and the legal heirs have to file an application to the insurance company within the prescribed period and the said application must be accompanied by death certificate of the insured, proof of the title of the vehicle and the original policy. In the present case, insured died on 2.2.2016, but the legal heirs i.e. complainants neither have bothered to get transferred the vehicle in question in their name within the prescribed period of three months nor obtained a new insurance policy after getting the vehicle transferred. Since, the complainants had no insurable interest at the time of accident, therefore, they are not entitled to get any amount and after receipt of the surveyor report, the O.Ps. rightly repudiated the claim vide registered letter dated 18.1.2017. Rest of the paras

4.               On being called upon to do so, the learned counsel for the complainant has tendered affidavit of complainant Ex.C1 along with documents Ex.C2 to Ex.C10 and closed the evidence. The learned counsel for the O.Ps. No.1 & 2 has tendered duly sworn affidavit of Sh. D.K.Goyal, Sr. Branch Manager, of the Oriental Insurance Company Limited Ex.OP1 along with documents Ex.OP2 to Ex.OP7 and closed the evidence.

5.               We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record of the file, carefully.

6.               The grievance of the complainant is that inspite of the fact that the vehicle in question was duly insured with the O.Ps. They refused to pay the claim amount. On the contrary, the stand of the O.Ps. is that at the time of accident of the vehicle in question, the insurance policy was in the name of Late Sh. Brij Mohan Nanda, who died on 2.2.2016. As per condition No.9 of the terms and conditions of the policy, the complainants being the legal heirs of the late Sh. Brij Mohan Nanda, were to get transferred the vehicle in question in their name or to obtain a new insurance policy for the vehicle in question, but nothing was done by them. Since, the complainants had no insurable interest at the time of accident, therefore, they are not entitled to get any claim amount. 

7.               From the perusal of copy of motor insurance certificate cum policy schedule Ex.C5, it is evident that the vehicle in question was duly insured in the name of Late Sh. Brij Mohan Nanda, with the O.Ps. From the death certificate, Ex.C8, it is evident that the said Sh. Brij Mohan Nanda, died on 2.2.2016. It may be stated that parties are bound by the terms and conditions of the insurance policy. In condition No.9, of the two wheeler package policy, Ex.OP3, reads as under:-    

“In the event of death of the sole insured, this policy will not be immediately lapse but will remain valid for a period of three months from the date of death of the insured or till expiry of this policy whichever is earlier. During the said period, legal heir(s) of the insured to whom the custody and use of the Motor Vehcile passes may apply to have this policy transferred to the name(s) of the heir(s) or obtain a new insurance policy for the Motor Vehicle.

          Where such legal heir(s) desire (s) to apply for transfer of this policy or obtain a new policy for the vehicle such heir(s) should make an application to the company accordingly within the aforesaid period. All such application should be accompanied by:

a. Death certificate in respect of the insured

                    b. Proof of title to the vehicle

                    c. Original policy.”

As per above referred condition No.9, of the insurance policy, the complainants were bound to get transferred the vehicle in question in their names or to obtain a fresh insurance policy of the vehicle in question. Although, the complainant No.1 has contended that on the instructions of the O.Ps. she got transferred the vehicle in question in her name and lodge the claim with the O.Ps yet, no document has been placed on record by her to show that she got transferred the vehicle in question in her name. In this view of the matter, we are of the considered opinion that as per terms and conditions of Insurance Policy, the complainants are not entitled to get any claim amount. We do not find any merit in the present complaint, consequently, we dismiss the same without any order as to cost.  

8.          The certified copies of this order be supplied to the parties    forthwith, free of costs, as permissible under the rules and the file be       indexed and consigned to Record Room.

 

          ANNOUNCED                                                                       (NEENA SANDHU)

          Dated .29.08.2017                                                PRESIDENT

 

 

                                                           (SHAVINDER KAUR)

                                                                              MEMBER