Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Rohtak.

                                                          Complaint No. : 402.

                                                          Instituted on     : 02.09.2015.

                                                          Decided on       : 16.02.2017.

Ajeet Singh s/o Sh. Ram Chander R/o H.No.135-L, Model Town, Rohtak.

                                                          ………..Complainant.

                             Vs.

United India Insurance co. Ltd. Divisional office, Jawahar Market, Opp. Model Twon, Rohtak.

                                                          ……….Opposite party.

COMPLAINT U/S 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986.

BEFORE:  SH.JOGINDER KUMAR JAKHAR, PRESIDENT.

                   MS. KOMAL KHANNA, MEMBER.

                   SH. VED PAL, MEMBER.            

Present:       Sh. Sanjay Sharma, Advocate for the complainant.

                   Sh. O.P.Punia, Advocate for opposite party.

                                      ORDER

SH. JOGINDER KUMAR JAKHAR, PRESIDENT :

1.                          The present complaint has been filed by the complainant with the averments that he had purchased a vehicle Innova and the same was registered as tourist motor cab/taxi vide Regn. No.HR-46-D-1340. It is averred that the alleged vehicle was insured from the opposite party for the period from 23.07.2014 to 22.07.2015. It is averred that complainant has purchased the said vehicle for commercial purpose and for self earning but when he could not achieve his commercial motive, he applied for conversion of his vehicle from commercial to private and after changing the same from  commercial to private the Registration no.HR-12x-8542 was issued. It is averred that soon after conversion of the vehicle, the complainant intimated the opposite party and asked to issue a fresh insurance policy with private number and the opposite party issued a fresh insurance policy bearing the same i.e. previous policy number and just made the changing in the column of registration number. It is averred that complainant requested the opposite party to refund the excess premium taken for commercial purpose but the opposite party assured the complainant that he need not worry about it. It is averred that on 17.10.2014 the vehicle of the complainant met with an accident and the complainant immediately informed the opposite party and the opposite party appointed a surveyor who directed the complainant to park the vehicle with Satyam Auto Pvt. Ltd. for further action. It is averred that on the aspect of opposite party the Satyam Auto Pvt. Ltd. provided the estimate to the opposite party and the opposite party after receipt of the same, declare the vehicle total loss and assured the complainant to make his payment of sum assured shortly.  It is averred that opposite party told the complainant that the value of his vehicle remains Rs.480000/- and also advised the complainant to sold the vehicle and the opposite party shall make him the balance payment of Rs.798000/- minus Rs.480000/- i.e. Rs.318000/- but despite his repeated requests, the balance payment has not been paid to the complainant. It is averred that opposite party vide letter dated 04.08.2015 had repudiated the genuine claim of the complainant on false grounds. It is averred that the act of opposite party is illegal and amounts to deficiency in service. As such it is prayed that opposite party may kindly be directed to pay the amount of Rs.318000/- alongwith interest, compensation and litigation expenses to the complainant.

2.                          On notice opposite party appeared and filed its written reply submitting therein that the above said vehicle was commercial vehicle till 30.09.2014 but the insured got his vehicle insured as private vehicle and got the endorsement done on 17.10.2014 for change of Registration number from commercial vehicle to private vehicle simply submitting the copy of RC of the vehicle bearing Registration No.HR012X-8542 by concealing the material fact i.e. the accident had already taken place at 4.00 p.m. on 17.10.2014 whereas the intimation was given to the office on  20.10.2014 after a gap of period of approx. three days.  On merits it is submitted that there has been concealment of material facts at the time of conversion to policy from commercial to private.  It is denied that the vehicle was declared as total loss. It is averred that complainant submitted consent letter for Rs.318000/- net after deducting policy clause on Net of salvage basis (with RC) in full and final settlement, subject to terms and conditions of the policy of insurance and approval of the company. The surveyor had assessed the loss of Rs.318000/- but the claim was rightly repudiated by the company due to concealment of fact by the complainant. It is averred that complainant is not entitled for any relief and as such the present complaint may kindly be dismissed with costs.

3.                          Both the parties led evidence in support of their case.

4.                          Complainant in his evidence tendered his affidavit Ex.CW1/A, documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C7, and has closed his evidence. On the other hand, ld. Counsel for opposite party tendered affidavit Ex.RW1/A, documents Ex.R1 to Ex.R11 and has closed his evidence.

5.                          We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through material aspects of the case very carefully.

6.                          In the present case insurance and accident of the vehicle is not disputed.  After the accident of vehicle, complainant filed the claim with the opposite party. Opposite party appointed the surveyor who as per his report Ex.R7 has assessed the loss amounting to Rs.318000/- but the same was repudiated by the opposite party vide its letter Ex.R2 on the ground that the complainant got the endorsement done on 17.10.2014 for change of Registration number from commercial vehicle to private vehicle simply submitting the copy of RC of the vehicle bearing Registration No.HR-12X-8542 by concealing the material fact i.e. the accident had already taken place at 4.00 p.m. on 17.10.2014 whereas the intimation was given to the office on 20.10.2014 after a lapse of period  approx. three days.    

7.                          After going through the file and hearing the parties it is observed that the claim of the complainant has been repudiated by the opposite party on the ground of concealment of fact at the time of change of registration number from commercial vehicle to private vehicle.  In this regard it is observed that as per letter Ex.C4 dated 25.08.2014 a direction was given by the R.T.A., Rohtak to register the vehicle as a private vehicle after completing all the legal formalities.  As per report of investigator Ex.R5  the RC has been transferred into private vehicle on dated 01.10.2014. In this regard it is observed that the accident had taken place on 17.10.2014 and the R.C. was got transferred from commercial to private on 01.10.2014 i.e. prior to the accident. It is observed that as per Policy Endorsement Schedule Ex.R10 and Ex.R11, the effective date of commencement of Insurance is from 00:00 on 17.10.2014 which shows that the endorsement was effective from 00:00 on 17.10.2014 whereas the time of accident as per the report of surveyor is 4:00P.M. Hence it is not proved that the accident had already taken before endorsement of the policy.  Moreover the vehicle was insured at the time of accident whether for commercial or private and the premium for commercial vehicle was more than the private vehicle.  It is also observed that it is not proved on file that the terms and conditions of the policy have been supplied to the insured and have also not been placed on record.  In this regard we have placed reliance upon the law cited in 2013(1)CLT 589 titled as New India Asurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Pabbati Sridevi & Others whereby Hon’ble National Commission has held that: “Terms and conditions therein, not communicated to the insured-Whether can be used by Insurance Company-No-Held that the terms and conditions were never issued to the insured-Policy is in the nature of standard, printed documents. There is nothing to show that its contents were part of the policy document issued to the insured-Terms and conditions in insurance policy cannot be rely upon by insurance company”.  Regarding the delayed intimation to the opposite party it is observed that the accident had taken place on 17.10.2014 and the office of company was closed on 18.10.2014 and 19.10.2014 being Saturday and Sunday. So it was informed after two days to the opposite party and there is no delay in intimating the opposite party. In this regard we have placed reliance upon the law cited in 2008(3)CLT 377 titled Dharmendra Goel Vs. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has held that: “If a particular claim to compensation is possible on the material on record, it should not be denied on hypertechnical pleas that claim was limited by complainant to a lower amount”. In view of the aforesaid law which are fully applicable on the facts and circumstances of the case it is observed that the complainant is entitled for the claim as per report of surveyor Ex.R7.

8.                                 In view of the facts and circumstances of the case it is observed that opposite party shall pay the amount of Rs.318000/-(Rupees three lac eighteen thousand only) along with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing the present complaint i.e. 02.09.2015 till its actual  realization and shall also pay a sum of Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand only) as litigation expenses to the complainant maximum within one month from the date of decision failing which the opposite party shall be liable to pay further interest @ 12% p.a. on the awarded amount from the date of decision.  Complaint is allowed accordingly.

9.                          Copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of costs.

10.                        File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced in open court:

16.02.2017.

                                                          ................................................

                                                          Joginder Kumar Jakhar, President

                                                          ..........................................

                                                          Komal Khanna, Member.

                                                                        ……………………………….

                                                          Ved Pal, Member