BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SIRSA.
Consumer Complaint no. 241 of 2012
Date of Institution : 05.12.2012
Date of Decision : 04.10.2016
Naresh Kumar son of Shri Manohar Lal, resident of village Abubshahar, Tehsil Dabwali, District Sirsa.
….Complainant.
Versus
1. United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Sirsa through its Divisional Manager.
2. Branch Manager, United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Dabwali.
..…Opposite parties.
Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986.
Before: SHRI S.B.LOHIA………………………………PRESIDENT
SHRI RANBIR SINGH PANGHAL…………MEMBER.
Present: Sh.A.K.Gupta, Advocate for the complainant.
Sh.R.K.Chaudhary, Advocate for the opposite parties.
ORDER
Case of complainant, in brief, is that being registered owner of Car Fiat Punto bearing registration No. HR-25C/733, he got insured the vehicle comprehensively from the opposite parties vide policy no.1119013111P001089262 w.e.f. 7.10.2011 to 6.10.2012. On 10.5.2012, the car met with an accident and was badly damaged. Accordingly, a claim was lodged with the ops for the loss caused to the car. The ops had appointed Sh. Raj Kumar Singla, Surveyor and loss assessor for inspection of the vehicle and a spot survey was also got conducted. The complainant thereafter, took the vehicle to Mehta Motors Bathinda on 12.5.2012 and the said agency reported that it is a case of total loss to the car and same is not in a position to be repaired. Inspite of all the formalities completed by the complainant as per instruction of insurance company, the ops have not settled the claim of the complainant so far and putting off the claim on one pretext or the other. The complainant is entitled to an amount of Rs.5,50,000/- on account of total loss to the car. The complainant also got served alegal notice on 1.11.2012 upon ops but to no effect. Hence, this complaint.
2. Upon notice, opposite parties appeared and filed reply. It is submitted that complainant submitted a proposal for insurance of his car and declared that he had not taken any claim for his vehicle in the previous policy. As per the terms of the GR-27, if the declaration is found false or any suppression/ concealment of any fact, the policy becomes void and all the rights to recover under the policy in respect of past or future claims are forfeited. On the report of the accident, the matter was taken up with the previous insurer i.e. Future Generalli India and it was clearly informed by them that the claim was reported under the policy and a sum of Rs.7600/- was paid to the complainant, which shows clear intentional breach on the part of the complainant and therefore, the contract of insurance has become void and all benefits under this policy stand forfeited. It is also submitted that on receipt of information regarding accident, a competent Surveyor Raj Kumar Singla was deputed to assess the loss, who assessed the loss to the tune of Rs.4,37,044.77/- and after deducting the salvage value of the vehicle assessed the amount payable as Rs.3,44,500/- for which complainant has also given his consent.
3. By way of evidence, the complainant produced affidavit Ex.C1, copy of DDR Ex.C2, copy of insurance cover note Ex.C3, legal notice Ex.C4, postal receipt Ex.C5. On the other hand, ops produced affidavit of Sh. K.R. Jain Divisional Manager as Ex.R1, insurance policy Ex.R2, copy of letter dated 26.11.2012 Ex.R3, copy of e-mail Ex.R4, copy of claim form Ex.R5 and copy of clause Ex.R6.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record of the case carefully.
5. The car in question of the complainant was insured with the opposite parties for a sum of Rs.5,50,000/- for the period from 7.10.2011 to 6.10.2012 as is evident from insurance cover note Ex.C3. During the subsistence of the policy in question, the car in question of the complainant met with an accident on 10.5.2012 and was totally damaged and the said fact is also not disputed by the opposite parties. The claim of the complainant has not been settled by the opposite parties rather have sent a letter dated 26.11.2012 to the complainant (copy placed on file as Ex.R3) intimating him that information furnished by him in proposal form found to be incorrect and wrong declaration submitted, thus, all the benefits under this policy in respect of section I of the policy stands forfeited and claim lodged by him is repudiated. In order to prove that complainant already received a sum of Rs.7600/- from previous insurance company, the opposite parties have not led any reliable and cogent evidence in this regard. The opposite parties are only relying upon an e-mail Ex.R4 but same is not proved on record that it belongs to the previous insurance company. No affidavit of the author/ representative of the previous insurance company has been placed on file to prove that actually the amount of Rs.7600/- was paid to the complainant for the loss to his vehicle. So the repudiation of the claim of the complainant is not justified and is hereby set aside.
6. Now we see to what amount of claim for the damage of the car in question, the complainant is entitled for? The complainant has alleged total loss to the car and has sought a sum of Rs.5,50,000/- being the insured value of the vehicle in question whereas according to the ops, the Surveyor appointed by them assessed the loss to the tune of Rs.4,37,044.77/- which would be just and sufficient amount to be awarded to the complainant.
7. Thus, as a sequel to our above discussion, we allow the present complaint and direct the opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs.4,37,044.77/- to the complainant for the total damage to his car alongwith interest @9% per annum from the date of filing of complaint i.e. 5.12.2012 till actual payment. We also direct the opposite parties to further pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- as compensation to the complainant for his harassment and Rs.3000/- as litigation expenses. This order should be complied by the opposite parties within a period of two months from today, failing which the complainant will be at liberty to initiate proceedings under Section 25/27 of the Act against the ops. Copy of this order be supplied to the parties as per rules. File be consigned to record room.
Announced in open Forum. President,
Dated:4.10.2016. Member. District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum, Sirsa.
