ORDER

Gulshan Prashar (Member)

1. Brief facts of the case are that the complainant owned a Tempo Traveller four wheeler bearing registration No. PB-01-3893. This vehicle was comprehensively insured with the opposite party vide Policy No. 200504/31/08/01/00001452. The complainant being a lady unable to visit various offices for the proper maintenance of

-2-

the documents and the vehicle, as such, she appointed Jaswant Lal as her true and lawful attorney..

2. That unfortunately, the aforesaid vehicle met with an accident on 12.11.2008 regarding which the matter was duly reported to the local police and FIR was registered in Police Station Subhanpur, District Kapurthala. The vehicle was badly damaged and the claim No. 220050431080190000220 was duly lodged with the opposite party for the recovery of a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- being the actual damage caused to the vehicle.

3. That on receiving the claim, the opposite party appointed a surveyor and loss assessor, who visited the damaged vehicle and took the photographs and other requisite documents from the possession of Jaswant Lal attorney of the complainant from time to time and ultimately, attorney of the complainant was made to believe that claim of Rs.1,07,000/- has been passed as per the recommended and the surveyor.

4. That the complainant was surprised to receive a letter dated 16.10.2009 from the opposite party vide which the claim of the complainant has been repudiated on account of the fact that the ownership of the vehicle in question has been transferred in the name of the attorney before the date of accident, but the insurance policy still stood in the name of principal complainant. The reason given by the opposite party for repudiation of the claim are illegal, arbitrary and uncalled for because the complainant has not transferred the ownership of the vehicle in the name of his attorney and even the registration certificate of the vehicle is still in the name

-3-

of the complainant. The attorney Jaswant Lal was authorized by the complainant to do some acts numerated in the power of attorney itself and nothing else and there was no occasion for the complainant or the attorney to get the insurance policy transferred in the name of attorney because Jaswant Lal was never the owner, nor at present he is the owner of the damaged vehicle and the repudiation of the claim of the complainant is wrong. Hence the present complaint.

5. Notice of the complaint was issued to the opposite party who appeared through their counsel and filed written statement taking as many as six preliminary objections such as the complaint is not maintainable and there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party and the complaint has been filed on the basis of incorrect and wrong facts and the complainant has not come to this Forum with clean hands and no cause of action has accrued to the complainant against the opposite party and this Forum has got no jurisdiction to entertain the present complaint etc. etc. On merits, the opposite parties refuted each and every point raised in the complaint.

6. The counsel for the complainant has tendered into evidence documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C7 Ex.CA along with affidavit of attorney of complainant and closed the evidence on 1.4.2010 by tendering total documents from Ex.C1 to Ex.C20.

7. On the other hand the opposite parties tendered into evidence affidavit of Shri J.R. Jassal AKM United India Insurance Co. Ex.R1 along with documents Ex.R2 to Ex.R9 and closed the evidence

-4-

closed the evidence of the opposite party tendering another affidavit Ex.R9 on 29.4.2010.

8. Ex.R6 is the report of surveyor and loss assessor. In this report, the name of the owner and insured is mentioned as Shalu Oberi (complainant) and the name of the driver is mentioned as Jaswant Lal son of Mohinder Lal and in column -(l), the registration Number of the vehicle is mentioned as No. PB-01-3893. In this report Ex.R6, M/s. Mehta & Co. had assessed the net loss to the vehicle as Rs.1,06,632/-. The counsel for the opposite party has drawn our attention to the copy of the FIR. This FIR was recorded on the statement of Jaswant Lal son of Mohinder Lal driver of the vehicle. He has stated in the FIR that I have purchased this vehicle from Shalu Oberi complainant about seven months ago and this vehicle is still in her name. The counsel for the complainant has drawn our attention that this fact is not correct. The complainant Shalu Oberi is still the owner of this vehicle and for argument sake, if the contents of the FIR are admitted to be correct, even then the transfer of tempo in the name of of the buyer is not necessary and he has drawn our attention to II (2008) CPJ 324 (NC) NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD VERSUS SUBHASH CHAND KATARIA (NC 325 wherein it is mentioned as under:-

"(ii) Insurance-Insurable interest-

Vehicle sold -No request made for

transfer of policy in name of buyer-

Accident claim repudiated- Contention,

buyer has no insurable interest, not

-5-

acceptable-As per circular issued by

General Insurance Company, on

transfer of vehicle, benefits under

policy in force, automatically

accrue to new owner-complaint

allowed by Forum-Appeal against

order dismissed-No interference

required in revision"

9. So in view of the decision of the Hon’ble National Commission, the repudiation letter does not carry any weight. Complainant Shalu Oberi claimed that she is the owner of the vehicle is correct and the surveyor has also given his report Ex.R6. So the repudiation letter Ex.R7 is not legally correct and is arbitrary.

In view of of the above discussion, we accept the complaint of the complainant and the report of surveyor Ex.R6 and direct the opposite party United India Insurance Co. Ltd. The Mall, Kapurthala through its Chief Manager to pay to the complainant Shalu Oberi a sum of Rs.1,06,632/-. This is amount of the loss assessed by the surveyor vide report Ex.R6 along with interest @ 8% per annum from the date of repudiation of the claim of complainant till realization of the claim along with Rs.2000/- as costs of the complaint payable by the opposite party to the complainant within

-6-

one month from the receipt of the copy of the order.

Copy of the order be sent to the parties through registered post free of costs. File be consigned to the record room.

Dated: Shashi Narang Gulshan Prashar Paramjit Singh

13.05.2010 Member Member President