BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BHIWANI.
Complaint No. :93 of 2010.
Date of Institution: 3.2.2010.
Date of Decision: 27.8.2015.
Sombir Singh son of Shri Mahender Singh, resident of village Bindrawan, tehsil Charkhi Dadri, district Bhiwani.
….Complainant.
Versus
- United India Insurance Company Ltd. through its Branch Manager, SCF No.8, Commercial Urban Estate, 1 Red Square Market, Hisar.
- Ashok Leyland Finance Ltd. through its Manager, 216, 1st Floor Green Square Market, Opposite Telephone Exchange, Hisar.
…...Opposite Parties.
COMPLAINT UNDER SECTIONS 12 AND 13 OF
THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 1986.
BEFORE: - Shri Rajesh Jindal, President
Shri Balraj Singh, Member
Smt. Ansuya Bishnoi, Member
Present: Shri V.P.Sangwan, Advocate, for complainant.
Shri Avinash Sardana, Advocate for the OP No.1.
Shri R.K.Verma, Adv. for OP No.2.
ORDER:-
Rajesh Jindal, President:
ORDER
The case of the complainant in brief, is that he is owner of TATA Special bearing registration No. HR-18-3870 and the same was insured with the opposite party No.1. It is alleged that the above said vehicle was financed from OP No.2 and he has been making payment of installments regularly to the financer. The complainant further alleged that due to nonpayment of monthly installments the employees of OP No.2 have snatched the vehicle on 22.8.2002 and run away towards Rohtak side. The complainant further alleged that he lodged FIR No.219 dated 22.9.2002 against the employees of OP No.2. It is further alleged that the vehicle had met with an accident with a Bus and FIR No.140 dated 22.9.2002 was registered in PS Kalanaur, district Rohtak. It is also alleged that the accident had taken placed when the vehicle was in the possession of official of OP No.2 and as such, he is liable to indemnify the loss caused to him. The complainant further alleged that information was given to OP No.1 and requested for claim of vehicle but he failed to settle the claim. The complainant further alleged that he got prepared the repair estimate of the vehicle from Telemos Automobiles (P) Ltd. and as per estimate Rs.4,07,241/- was required to make the vehicle roadworthy that was to be paid by both the Ops jointly or severally. The complainant further alleged that vide order dated 10.4.2009 passed by this District Forum the complainant as well as OP No.2 were directed to submit the requisite documents to OP No.1 within 15 days from the date of order and as such in compliance of the order passed by this District Forum the complainant has sent all the relevant documents to OP No.1 but till date his claim has not been settled. The complainant further alleged that he visited the office of respondent No.1 several times and requested to pay the repair estimate amount but it did not pay any heed. Hence, the present complaint.
2. On appearance, opposite party No.1 has filed written statement alleging therein that on receipt of information about the alleged accident from insured/financer vide letter dated 26.9.2002 the surveyor was deputed for investigation. It is submitted that the insured as well as OP No.2 failed to supply the DL of the person who was driving the vehicle at the time of alleged accident. Even Shri Arvind Kumar re-possession agent of OP No.2 whose man had snatched the vehicle from complainant were taking to Rohtak and disclose the name of the drover at the time of accident but he failed to disclose the particulars of the DL, if any. It is also submitted that the insured as well as OP No.2 have also failed to supply the requisite documents within the stipulated period as ordered by this District Forum. Moreover, the complainant has claimed the loss suffered to the vehicle to the tune of Rs.4,07,241/-, rather loss has been assessed at Rs.2,22,852/- as per report of loss assessor but the answering OP is not liable to pay the same. Hence, in view of these circumstances, there is no deficiency in service on the part of answering opposite party.
3. OP No.2 on appearance also filed separate written statement alleging therein that the complainant approached to answering OP for grant of loan of Rs.2,80,000/- purchase of vehicle TATA Spacio and the loan amount along with interest and other charges were repayable in 36 monthly installments each of Rs.13,000/-. It is also submitted that after considering the contents of agreement the complainant has entered in to an agreement and signed the same after understanding the contents. It is also submitted that the complainant is chronic defaulter and failed to deposit the monthly installments as per agreement and a sum of Rs.2,23,540/- along with penal charges and other charges are still payable by the complainant to the answering OP. Hence, in view of these circumstances, there is no deficiency in service on the part of answering opposite party.
3. In order to make out his case, the complainant has placed on record Annexure C1 Photostat copy of order dated 10.4.2002, Annexure C2 Photostat copy of DL, Annexure C3 Photostat copy of claim application along with supporting affidavit.
4. In reply thereto, the opposite parties have placed on record Annexure R1/1 Photostat copy of Insurance Policy, Annexure R1/2 Photostat copy of letter, Annexure R1/3 Photostat copy of Survey Report Annexure R1/4 Photostat copy of Statement of Arvind Kumar, Annexure R1/5 Photostat copy of letter dated 26.5.2003, Annexure R1/6 Photostat copy of order dated 10.4.2009, Annexure R1/7 to R1/10 Photostat copies of letters and Annexure R110 & 11 are Photostat copies of FIR along with supporting affidavit.
5. We have gone through the record of the case carefully and have heard the learned counsels for the parties.
6. As per version of the complainant, the vehicle in question was forcibly taken in to possession by the Agent/Employee of OP No.2 /Financer of the vehicle and the complainant in this regard lodged FIR No.219 dated 22.9.2002 under Sections 34,323,506-IPC with the concerned Police Station. When the vehicle was being taken by the Agent/Employee of OP No.2 and it was in the possession of OP No.2, the vehicle met with an accident and FIR No.140 dated 22.9.2002 under Sections 279, 337 and 304-A IPC with lodged with Kalanaur Police Station. The OP No.2 financer of the vehicle has denied the allegations of the complainant in his reply.
7. The OP No.1/insurer has not settle the claim of the complainant for want of driving license of the person, who was driving the vehicle at the time of accident. The complainant has taken the plea that at the time of accident, the vehicle was not in his possession and the same was in the possession of OP No.2/financer and being driven by his Agent/Employee. The OP No.1 has produced the Motor Survey Report dated 7.2.2004 Annexure R1/3, according to the said report, at the time of accident the vehicle was in the possession of OP No.2 and was being driven by the Agent/Employee of OP No.2, therefore, OP No.2 can only disclose the name of the person who was driving the vehicle in question at the time of accident.
8. It is settled law that in an agreement of hire purchase, the purchaser remains merely on behalf of the financer and the ownership remains with the financer. From the facts of the case, the vehicle met with an accident when the same was in the custody of OP No.2 through its Agent/Employee. Therefore, it is OP No.2 who is liable to supply the driving license of the person who was driving the vehicle at the time of accident and got settled the claim from OP No.1. Accordingly, we direct OP No.2 to supply the driving license of the person, who was driving the vehicle at the relevant time, to OP No.1 and after receipt of the driving license, OP No.1 is directed to settle the claim within 90 days. If, OP No.2 fails to supply the driving license to OP No.1, then it will be entire responsibility of OP No.2, and the complainant can take the re-course of the legal proceedings for its claim against Op No.2 by way of filing Civil Suit in the competent court of law, if so advised.
9. With these observations, the complaint of the complainant is disposed of. No order as to costs.
Announced in open Forum.
Dated: 27.8 .2015.
(Rajesh Jindal)
President,
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum, Bhiwani.
(Ansuya Bishnoi) (Balraj Singh )
Member Member.
