BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL FORUM, JALANDHAR.

Complaint No.123 of 2014

Date of Instt. 16.4.2014

Date of Decision :9.12.2014

Liyakat Ali aged about 27 years son of Roshan Deen R/o VPO Meerpur, Tehsil & District Jalandhar.

..........Complainant

Versus

1. United India Insurance Company Ltd, 24, Whites Road, Chennai-6000014, through its Managing Director/Director etc.

2. United India Insurance Company Ltd, Divisional Office No.1, 19, G.T.Road, Jalandhar through its Divisional Manager/Incharge/Deputy Manager etc.

.........Opposite parties

Complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.

Before: S. Jaspal Singh Bhatia (President)

Ms. Jyotsna Thatai (Member)

Present: Sh.APS Pathania Adv., counsel for complainant.

Sh.SP Virdi Adv., counsel for opposite parties.

Order

J.S.Bhatia (President)

1. The complainant has filed the present complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986, against the opposite parties on the averments that the complainant owned a four wheeler Bolero, Maxi Truck Plus bearing having engine No.TADIF39834, Chassis No.MAIZP2TAKD2F62877, having temporary registration No.PB08BP-6313, permanent registration No.PB08-CH-5539. The said vehicle was purchased by the complainant from Raga Motors Pvt.Ltd, Jalandhar on 1.7.2013. The said vehicle was released on 2.7.2013 to the complainant by the above said Raga Motors. At the time of purchasing the above said vehicle, the complainant got the complete insurance cover from the opposite parties by making the payment of Rs.22,196/- and the representative of the insurance company who issued the cover note of the above said new vehicle represented that the complainant has been given all the covers of all the complete body of the vehicle and the passengers including the driver. The temporary registration certificate was issued on the same day at the time of purchase of the vehicle and the said registration certificate was valid upto 30 days for plying the vehicle on road. The fitness certificate of the new vehicle is not required and the vehicle which has been purchased by the complainant carried 2620 Kgms weight which has been exempted from obtaining any route permit. In this regard, the certificate issued by Regional Transport Authority, Jalandhar is also attached. Unfortunately, the new vehicle of the complainant met with an accident on 3.7.2013 and on the same day, the complainant took the vehicle for necessary repairs to the authorized service centre and as per invoice of repairs, the total amount to be paid on behalf of the complainant and the insurance company was Rs.79,070/-. Immediately, the insurance company which was informed well within time was also provided the copies of the bills and invoices but the opposite parties did not release the amount of the insurance to the complainant and accordingly after making the entire payment, the complainant got released the vehicle from the authorized service centre. All the bills and the documents were submitted well within time to the insurance company i.e opposite parties. After submission of the bills, the complainant was forced to approach pillar to the post and he was time and again asked to submit either one paper or the other paper and the insurance company had taken atleast 9 months in order to repudiate the claim of the complainant. During this period, the complainant was mentally and physically harassed by the officials of the insurance company and his grievances were not resolved. Lastly vide letter dated 21.3.2014, the insurance company illegally and unlawfully repudiated the claim of the complainant on the ground that at the time of accident, the route permit tax was not deposited with the concerned authorities. On such like averments, the complainant has prayed for directing the opposite parties to pay him Rs.79,070/- alongwith interest. He has also claimed compensation and litigation expenses.

2. Upon notice, the opposite parties appeared and filed a written reply pleading that complainant has concealed true and material facts from this forum which are quite necessary for the proper adjudication of the present complaint, it is pertinent to mention here that the complainant has got insured four wheeler Bolero Maxi Truck plus bearing No.PB-08CH-5539 on 1.7.2013 vide policy No.2005003113009245 at the time of purchase of said vehicle from Raga Motors Jalandhar and as the said vehicle pertains to carriage vehicle as such it was incumbent on the complainant to get the Route Permit from the appropriate authorities however in the present case complainant was negligent in getting the same. As the complainant has failed to get the route permit between 1.7.2013 to 3.7.2013 the alleged date of accident, as such the claim of the complainant was repudiated as "No Claim" as such answering opposite party has not committed any wrong and has done its duty as per the insurance policy guidelines. They denied other material averments of the complaint.

3. In support of his complaint, learned counsel for the complainant has tendered into evidence affidavit Ex.CA along with copies of documents Ex.C1 and Ex.C13 and closed his evidence.

4. On the other hand, learned counsel for opposite parties has tendered affidavit Ex.OP/A alongwith copy of document Ex.OP1 and closed evidence.

5. We have carefully gone through the record and also heard learned counsel for the parties.

6. It is not disputed that the insured vehicle of the complainant met with an accident. Ex.C2 is cover note issued by the opposite party insurance company. The insured vehicle was got repaired by the complainant. He submitted the claim with opposite party insurance company but opposite party insurance company repudiated his claim vide letter dated 21.3.2014 ExC-1 on the ground that at the time of accident i.e 3.7.2013 route permit tax was not deposited with concerned authorities. Counsel for the complainant contended that the vehicle in question was exempt from obtaining route permit. We have carefully considered this contention advanced by learned counsel for the complainant. The complainant has produced certificate of exemption Ex.C-11 issued by the Secretary Regional Transport Authority, Jalandhar, wherein it is specifically mentioned that vehicle No.PB08-CH-5539 i.e vehicle in question is having gross weight of 2620 Kgs and it stand exempted from obtaining any route permit. So opposite party insurance company repudiated the claim of the complainant on frivolous ground as the vehicle was exempt from obtaining any route permit and as such question of depositing route permit tax does not arise. Opposite party insurance company had appointed surveyor who submit his report dated 29.8.2013 Ex.OP1 assessing the net loss at Rs.52,921.42/-. We have no reason to disbelieve the loss assessed by the surveyor vide his report Ex.OP1.

7. In view of above discussion, the present complaint is accepted and opposite parties are directed to pay Rs.52,921.42/- to the complainant alongwith 9 % interest from the date of repudiation of his claim ie. Rs.21.3.2014 till the date of payment. The complainant is also awarded Rs.10,000/- in lump sum on account of compensation and litigation expenses. Copies of the order be sent to the parties free of costs under the rules. File be consigned to the record room.

Dated Jyotsna Thatai Jaspal Singh Bhatia

8.12.2014 Member President