In the Court of the
Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Unit -I, Kolkata,
8B, Nelie Sengupta Sarani, Kolkata-700087.
CDF/Unit-I/Case No. 204 / 2010.
1) Arjun Das,
48A, Gha Putuya Para Lane,
Sreerampur, P.S. Sreerampur,
Dist. Hooghly, - 712202. ---------- Complainant
---Versus---
1) The Senior Manager,
Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd.
Himalaya House, 8th Floor,
38B, Jawaharlal Nehru Road,
P.S. Shakespeare Sarani, Kolkata-71
2) The Branch Manager,
Reliance General Insurance Co.
Reliance Centre, 19, Walchand Hirachand Marg,
Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400001. ---------- Opposite Parties
Present : Sri Sankar Nath Das, President.
Dr. Subir Kumar Chaudhuri, Member
Smt. Sharmi Basu, Member
Order No. 23 Dated 16/11/2012.
The petition of complaint has been filed by the complainant Arjun Das against the o.ps. Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd. The case of the complainant in short is that complainant is the registered owner of the truck being regn. no.WB-23A-1078. O.p. no.1 insured vehicle on the terms and conditions that if any loss, harm, injury or damage happens during the validity period of insurance, he shall pay / indemnity to the owner of the vehicle and o.p. no.2 is also liable and responsible for the work and deed done by o.p. no.1. Complainant insured his aforesaid truck from o.p. no.1 being policy no.1517792334001761 and the policy was valid from 17.6.09 to 16.6.10. On 19.6.09 the said truck met with an accident at NH 34, Aishtala Garer Bagan, P.S. Ranaghat, Dist. Nadia and the truck was damaged completely and o.p. no.1 was informed instantly by complainant over phone and o.p. no.1 sent his surveyor at the spot and the surveyor after making inspection and taking some photographs of the truck, said to the complainant to repair his vehicle with his own cost and fund and the expenditure would be paid by o.ps. On the next day i.e. 20.6.09 Ranaghat P.S. was informed regarding the incident and FIR was lodged.
Thereafter, on the assurance of o.p. no.1, complainant got repaired his vehicle incurring Rs.4 lakhs from his own fund and claimed the same from o.p. no.1 and o.p. no.1 received all the relevant documents and papers and receipts in original from complainant and assured to pay the claim amount within a week. Thereafter, complainant repeatedly asked o.p. no.1 for the payment of the claim but o.p. no.1 deferred the matter on different pretexts. Then o.p. no.1 repudiated the claim of the complainant vide letter dt.26.11.09. On 30.4.10 complainant gave legal notice to the o.ps. for settlement of the aforesaid claim but in vain. Hence the case was filed by complainant with the prayer contained in the petition of complaint.
Both o.ps. had entered their appearance in this case by filing w/v and denied all the material allegations labeled against them and prayed for dismissal of the case. Ld. lawyer of o.ps. in the course of argument submitted that the case has got no merit and the same is liable to be dismissed.
Decision with reasons:-
We have gone through the pleadings of the parties, evidence and documents in particular. It appears from the record that the complainant is a registered owner of a truck bearing no.WB-23A-1078 and the said vehicle was under insurance policy coverage of o.ps. and said vehicle met with an accident on 19.6.09 and the surveyor of o.ps. inspected the spot and requested complainant to cause the truck repair at his own cost and complainant had to incur Rs.4 lakhs for repairing of the vehicle in question and matter was brought to the notice of Ranaghat P.S. and FIR was lodged on 20.6.09. O.p. no.1 repudiated the claim on 26.11.09. We find from the record that intimation was given to o.ps. after 6 days from the date of accident i.e. on 26.6.09 and it has been submitted by o.ps. in their letter dt.26.11.09 which has been annexed by complainant in his petition of complaint that at the time of proposal, complainant have submitted a renewal notice vide SR No.OER-DCT dt.1.5.09 issued by ITGI. On verification o.ps. have found that there is no renewal notice issued b y ITGI in the name of complainant.
It is clear from the record that fake renewal letter was furnished at the time of taking policy from o.ps. by complainant and same was ascertained by the surveyor of o.ps. vide annex-C and C1 annexed with the evidence of o.ps. and it goes to show obviously that the policy was not valid at the time of accident in question. So it is presumed that the insurance cannot be construed as a valid one on the date of accident of the vehicle in question. That apart, 6 days delay in intimating o.ps. as regards accident is fatal and no satisfactory explanation has been put forward by complainant acceptable to this Forum and in this aspect we rely upon Hon’ble National Commission’s decision published in 2003(Vol-III) CPJ 77 and Hon’ble Supreme Court’s decision published in AIR 2010 SC 1704 and Hon’ble State Commission, West Bengal in CC 14 of 2010. Moreover, it has been contended by o.ps. that he incurred Rs.4 lakhs for the repairing of the vehicle, but there is no voucher lying with the record in support of such expenditure.
In view of the findings above and on careful scrutiny of the entire materials on record we find and hold that the repudiation of the claim of the complainant by o.ps. is quite justified and complainant is not entitled to relief.
Hence, ordered,
That the case stands dismissed on contest without cost.
Supply certified copy of this order to the parties free of cost.
