Haryana

Fatehabad

CC/250/2019

Sanjay - Complainant(s)

Versus

United India Insurance Company - Opp.Party(s)

Devi Lal

22 Sep 2023

ORDER

BEFORE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, FATHEBAAD.

 

                                                        Complaint No.  250 of 2019

                                                        Date of instt:      08.07.2019

                                                        Date of Decision: 22.09.2023

 

Sanjay son of Mahabir resident of village Dhani Chhatriya, Tehsil & District Fatehabad.

 

                                                                           ...Complainant.

Versus

1. United India Insurance Company Limited, Branch Office 75-A Anaj Mandi, Fatehabad Tehsil & District Fatehabad through its Branch Manager.

 

2.Goyal  Metadoors Spares, 666-Auto Market, Hisar District Hisar through its authorized signatory.

                                                                                         …Respondents

 

3.Krishan Kumar son of Om Parakash resident of H.No.404, Azad Nagar, Fatehabad Tehsil & District Fatehabad.

 

                                                                          …Opposite party.

Complaint under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986

 

 

BEFORE:                  SH.RAJBIR SINGH, PRESIDENT.    

                                SMT.HARISHA MEHTA, MEMBER                

                                      DR.K.R.NIRANIA, MEMBER

 

Present: -     Sh. Devi Lal, counsel for complainant.

                   Sh.N.D.Mittal, counsel for Opposite party No.1.                                         Ops No.2 & 3 exparte vide order dated 14.08.2019 and 24.10.2019.

 

 

 

Order

SH.RAJBIR SINGH, PRESIDENT

 

                   The facts of the present complaint are that the complainant was the registered owner of vehicle Jeep Cruiser bearing registration No.HR-62-5262 and the vehicle in question was sold to Krishan Kumar; that the vehicle was insured with Op No.1 vide policy No.1119033118P108090188 having validity for the period 22.09.2018 to 21.09.2019; that the insurance of the vehicle is standing in the name of the complainant; that on 28.01.2019, the vehicle in question met with an accident and regarding this intimation was given to the Op  No.1; that the vehicle in question was taken to the Op No.2 for its repair; that the complainant and proforma submitted the relevant documents and bill with the Op No.1 with a request to make the payment of claim amount of the damaged vehicle but no amount has been paid to the complainant. The act and conduct of the Ops clearly amounts to deficiency in service on its part. In evidence, the complainant has tendered his affidavit Annexure CW1/A alongwith document Annexure C1.

2.                Upon notice, only OP No.1 appeared and filed its reply whereas Op No.2 did not appear before this Commission despite issuance of notice through registered post, therefore, it was proceeded against exparte vide order dated 14.08.2019. Since the Op No.3 remained absence during the proceedings of this complaint, therefore, it was proceeded against exparte vide order dated 24.10.2019.  Op No.1 in its reply has taken preliminary objections such as cause of action, locus standi and estopal etc. It has been further submitted that there is delay of 2 days intimating the replying OP as the accident was occurred on 28.01.2019 and the intimation was given on 30.01.2019; that during investigation it came to the knowledge of replying Op that the vehicle had already been sold to Krishan Kumar on 16.01.2019 but on 16.09.2019 the vehicle was owned by complainant Sanjay Kumar; that the surveyor in its report has assessed the net payable amount to the tune of Rs.74501/- but that amount could not paid to the complainant as he was not having insurable interest at the time of accident because the vehicle in question was already sold by him prior to accident; that there is a specific process of getting the insurance transferred as per the provisions of GR-17 of Indian Motor Tariff, but the same has neither been followed by the seller nor the buyer of the vehicle in question. Other pleas made in the compliant have been contorverted and prayer for dismissal of the complaint has been made.  In evidence, the appearing Op  has tendered affidavit of sh.R.P.Kamboj, Divisional Incharge as Ex.RW1/A with documents Annexure R1 to Annexure R7.

3.                We have heard learned counsels for the parties and carefully gone through the case file.

4.                The Op No.1 has repudiated the claim of the complainant mainly on the grounds that there is delay of two days in intimating the insurance company and the complainant was having no insurable interest in the vehicle in question at the time of accident as it had already been sold to Krishan Kumar on 16.01.2019, therefore, there is clear cut violation of provision of GR-17 of India Motor Tariff, which is reproduced as under:-

“GR.17. Transfers On transfer of ownership, the Liability Only cover, either under a Liability Only policy or under a Package policy, is deemed to have been transferred in favour of the person to whom the motor vehicle is transferred with effect from the date of transfer.

The transferee shall apply within fourteen days from the date of transfer in writing under recorded delivery to the insurer who has insured the vehicle, with the details of the registration of the vehicle, the date of transfer of the vehicle, the previous owner of the vehicle and the number and date of the insurance policy so that the insurer may make the necessary changes in his record and issue fresh Certificate of Insurance”.

5.                Undisputedly, the insured vehicle met with an accident during the subsistence of the policy on 28.01.2019.  The fact regarding selling of insured vehicle to one Krishan Kumar is also not disputed.  Vide Annexure R5, the vehicle was sold by the complainant to one Krishan Kumar and the purchaser of the vehicle had applied for transferring of the ownership in his name by depositing the fee of Rs.1950/- with the Registering Authority, Fatehabad only on 28.01.2019 at 16:47:25 as is mentioned in Annexure R1 whereas the investigator of the company in his report Annexure R3 has mentioned the Transfer Date as 24.01.2019. The insurance company has specifically mentioned in its reply that the affidavit (Annexure R5) qua selling of vehicle in question was executed on 16.01.2019. GR-17 of India Motor Tariff gives 14 days time for transferring the registration certificate of the vehicle in the name of purchaser, therefore, the purchaser/seller was having 14 days time and if we count the sale date as 16.01.2019 even then the purchaser/seller was free to apply for the transferring of the ownership of the vehicle upto 30.01.2019, therefore, the plea of GR-17 of India Motor Tariff qua not having the insurable interest by the complainant at the time of accident raised by the Op No.1 insurance company is not applicable, hence, it is hereby rejected.

6.                          It is established on the case file that the insured met with the accident during the subsistence of the policy and the complainant was having insurable interest in the insured vehicle but from the act and conduct of the Op No.1/insurance company it appears that the insurance company in this way or that way wants to avoid/linger on the genuine claim of the complainant.  The insurance company is not supposed to earn profit/premium from the customer as it is its prime duty to indemnify the claim for the loss if causes during the subsistence of the policy.  It is a settled proposition of law that Surveyor is the best person to assess the loss and his report cannot be brushed aside, being important piece of evidence, unless there is cogent and convincing evidence.  In this regard we rely upon a judgment titled as United India Insurance Co. Vs. Maya, CPJ 2008 (2) page (NC) page 182  wherein it has been held that a surveyor report should not be dismissed summarily as the surveyor is an independent and qualified person under the relevant provisions of Insurance Act, 1938.   Further, in the present matter, the surveyor in his report  (Annexure R7) has clearly mentioned net loss to the vehicle to the tune of Rs.74501/-. Therefore,  we are of the considered opinion that the end of justice would met if we direct the Op No.1  to make the payment of Rs.74501/- to the complainant as claim on account of damage of insured vehicle during the subsistence of the policy.

7.                          Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances, the present complaint is hereby allowed and the Op No.1 is hereby directed to make the payment of Rs. 74501/- (as per the report of surveyor Annexure R7) to the complainant alongwith interest @ 6 % per annum from the date of filing of this compliant till its realisation.  We also direct the Op No.1 to pay Rs.11,000/- in lump sum for mental agony, harassment and litigation expenses to the complainant. Compliance of this order be made within 45 days failing which the awarded amount would carry 9 % interest from the date of filing of the complaint till its realization.  The complaint against Ops No.2 & 3 stands dismissed.

8.                          In default of compliance of this order, proceedings against respondents shall be initiated under Section 72 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 as non-compliance of court order shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than one month, but which may extend to three years, or with fine, which shall not be less than twenty five thousand rupees, but which may extend to one lakh rupees, or with both. A copy of this order be sent to the parties free of cost. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.     

Announced in open Commission

Dated: 22.09.2023

       

 

                                                                                                        

          (K.S.Nirania)                       (Harisha Mehta)                (Rajbir Singh)                              Member                               Member                                           President