Punjab

Fatehgarh Sahib

RBT/CC/974/2018

Sukhwinder Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

United india insurance - Opp.Party(s)

D.S.Dhaliwla

13 Apr 2023

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL

                                    COMMISSION

                                FATEHGARH SAHIB

 

RBT No.	:	CC/974/2018
Complaint No.	:	RBT/CC/974 of 2018
Date of Institution	:	18/09/2018
Date of Decision	:	13/04/2023

 

                  

Sukhwinder Singh S/o  Gurdev Singh, H. No.126, Vill. Khizrabad,Tehsil Kharar,Distt.SAS Nagar, Mohali.

                                                                                                                     …………....Complainant

 

                                                Versus

 

1.  M/s United India Insurance Company Limited, Motor dealers division, 6^th floor, Krishi Bhawan, Nrupatunga Road, Hudson Circle, Bengaluru, Karnataka-560001 through its Managing Director.
2. M/s United India Insurance Company Limited S.C.O No.72, Phase9 , SAS Nagar,Mohali through its Manager.
3. M/s United India Insurance Company Limited, Toyota Tsusho Insurance Broker, India Pvt. Limited c/o Globe Toyta B-51 Opp. Verka Milk Plant, Industrial Area, Phase 6, SAS Nagar,Mohali through its Manager.

 

                                                                              ..………....... Opposite Parties

 

 

Complaint under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act 1986(Old)

 

Quorum

Sh. S.K.Aggarwal, President

Sh. Manjit Singh Bhinder, Member

Present: Sh.K.S.Mattu, counsel for complainant.

      Sh.M.L.Chaudhary, Counsel for OPs no.1 and 2.

      Service of OP no.3 already dispensed with.

 

 The complaint has been filed against the OPs (opposite parties)  under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act-1986(old) alleging deficiency in service with the prayer to give directions to the OPs to pay the actual claim of the   amount Rs.4.5 Lacs  -,  to pay Rs. 2 Lacs  as  compensation i.e total amount of Rs.6.5 Lac along with  future interest @ 18%/-  as compensation for harassment, mental agony  to the complainant .

2.  The  OP no.1 is engaged in providing service of insurance of vehicle and the complainant  is having a vehicle Toyota Etios PB01 A 2767  , which is being plied as taxi by the complaint.  Op no.3 is authorized agent of Op no.1 and the complainant got his vehicle insured from OP no.3 vide Policy no.TU1/1121977 dated 31 March 2017 valid for period 31 March 2017  to 30 march 2018. The Complainant  has also paid a sum of Rs. 46,010/-  towards the premium  amount.  On the after noon of 21 March 2018, the car Toyota Etios  PB01A 2767 met with an accident at Thlot near Shalanal, Mandi, H.P and FIR no.0041 dated 21 March 2018 was got registered at Police Station  Aut Mandi, H.P against the offending bus bearing  Registration no.PB 32 P 3872. The car of the complainant got damaged in said accident and the complainant had filed a claim  form with all the relevant documents and submitted the same in office of OP no.2. Ops are intentionally and deliberately not settling the claim of the complainant  and  repudiated the claim with the reason that the driver of the vehicle was not having  effective and valid  driving license at the time of accident. Hence this complaint.
3. Notice of the complaint was given to the OPs through registered Post. OPs  no.1 and 2 appeared  through their Counsel and filed  written version. Op no.3  is dispensed with vide order dated 16.4.2019 by the Commission.
4. The OPs no.1 and 2 filed joint written version raising  legal  objections that the  OPs are providing  hassle free claim settlements. The claim of the complainant  should have been settled in case the claim fulfils the policy  terms and conditions. But in the present case driver of the  insured vehicle was not holding a valid and effective driving license  to drive a transport vehicle at the time of accident  as such the claim could not  be settled and hence repudiated. Hence prayer of dismissal of complaint has been made.
5.                The complainant in support of his complaint tendered in evidence his  affidavit Ex.CW1/1 along with copies of  documents i.e  Ex.C1    Registration certificate, Ex.C2 certificate of insurance cum Policy schedule bearing Policy TU1/1121977 dated 31 March 2017 valid for period 31 March 2017  to 30 march)   , Ex.C3  Repudiation letter  , Ex.C4 certificate of Police Station Aut Mandi. Ex.C5 Form 47 of Govt.of Punjab, Ex.C6 Form-38 , Ex.C7 vehicle release order by judicial Magistrate Mandi, HP,  Ex.C8 contract carriage permit,  Ex.C9 Tax clearance certificate dated 2.1.2018,  Ex.C10 receipt of tax,  Ex.C11 receipt dated 5.1.2018. In rebuttal the OPs tendered in evidence Ex.OPRW/A affidavit of Sonika, Deputy Manger, United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Mohali,  Ex.OP/R1 Policy along with terms and conditions Ex.OP/R2 survey report,  Ex.OP/R3 copy of affidavit, Ex.OP/R4 opinion report,  Ex.OP/R5 copy of Driving Licence, Ex.OP/R6 repudiation letter and closed their evidence.
6.  Heard. Entire record has been perused. 
7.  Admittedly , the claim of the complainant was repudiated by the OPs on the ground that the driver of the vehicle was not having valid  licence at the time of accident required as  per terms and conditions vide Ex. C3. The OPs vide their affidavit  Ex.OPRW/A stated that the Driving License produced by the insurer was valid only to drive LMV and not  LMV Cab(Taxi). The complainant has proved  Driving license of  LMV  vehicle , which is Ex.C4. The crux of the matter is that OPs have repudiated the claim on the  ground that the ensured was eligible for driver LMV but not eligible for driving LMV (Cab). The OPs have assessed  Loss of  the vehicle   through their surveyor  as Rs.2,33,277/- (with RC) vide Ex.OPR/2.

The complainant has relied upon the judgement of Hon’ble Supreme court of India in CivilAppeal no.5826 of 2011 decided on 3/7/2017titledMukund Dewangan  Vs Oriental Insurance Company Limited wherein it has been heldthat when a driver is holding a license to drive light motor vehicle (LMV), he is competent to drive transport vehicle of that category without specific endorsement to drive the transport vehicle .

          8  As  a corollary of our above discussion, the present complaint is partly allowed.  OP no.1 is held liable for deficiency in service.            The OPs are directed as under :-

          To  pay  the amount of Rs.2,33,277/-   (with RC) to the complainant along with interest  @ 6% P.A from the date of filing of                       complaint within 30 days, failing which interest @ 9% P.A. shall be payable

Compliance of the order be made by the OPs within 30 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Failing which the complainant shall be entitled to recover the above said amount through legal process. The complaint could not be decided within the statutory period due to pandemic of Covid-19 and  paucity  of staff   . Copy of this order be sent to the complainant and the OPs as per rules. File be returned back District Commission, Mohali, for proper consignment. .

Pronounced 13April 2023

                                                           

                                                                      (S.K. Aggarwal)

                                                                              President

                                                                    

    

                                                                            

 

                                                                             ( Manjit Singh Bhinder )

                                                                                          Member