Jammu and Kashmir

Jammu

CC/620/2017

SHABIR AHMED - Complainant(s)

Versus

UNIVERSAL SAMPOO INSURANCE - Opp.Party(s)

AJJAZ LONE

13 Oct 2018

ORDER

DISTRICT    CONSUMER     DISPUTES   REDRESSAL  FORUM, JAMMU

                (Constituted under J&K Consumer Protection Act,1987)

                                                         

 Case File  No.               404/DFJ         

 Date of  Institution   :  17-03-2015

 Date of Decision      :    11-09-2018

 

Shabir Ahmed,

S/O Abdul Karim,

R/O Champa Baram,Batote,

Distt.Ramban,A/P H.No.302,

Mohalla Ustad,Jammu.

                                                                                                                                                                Complainant

                  V/S

1.Universal Sompo General Insurance Co.Ltd.

  Through its Branch Manager,A-313,2^nd Floor,

  NIFD Complex, Karan Market, Near Indira Chowk,

  Opp.General Bus Stand, Jammu.

2.Sanjay Gupta,S/O Sh.Shiv Kumar,

  R/O Ward No.5,Batote Distt.Ramban.

                                                                                                                                                   Opposite parties

                                

     CORAM:-

                  Khalil Choudhary            (Distt.& Sessions Judge)      President

                  Ms.Vijay Member

                  Mr.Ghulam Sarwar Chauhan                                     Member

 

In the matter of: Complaint under section 10 of J&K Consumer

                              Protection Act 1987.

 

Mr.Ayjaz Lone,Advocate for complainant, present.

Mr.Dewakar Sharma,Advocate for OP1, present.

Nemo for OP2.

 

                                                   ORDER

 

                         Facts relevant for the disposal of complaint on hand are that; complainant is said to have purchased car Maruti 800 bearing registration No.JK06-0577 from OP2,namely,Sanjay Gupta and subsequently the name of complainant was entered into the registration certificate by the competent authority on,20-03-2013 (Copy of Registration Certificate is annexed as Annexure-A).According to complainant, soon after the transfer of registration certificate of car in his name, he on,22-03-2015 approached the agent of OP1 (Insurance Company),namely,Pawan Sharma to get his name entered in the Insurance Policy of vehicle in question. It is important to mention here that the OP2 who is the erstwhile owner of the vehicle in question, had purchased an Insurance Policy bearing No.2311/52621115/00/800 after paying the premium for the same for a sum assured of Rs.60,000/-and the said policy was issued for the period from 11-10-2012 to 10-10-2013.Complainant further submitted that the agent of OP1 took the particulars and assured him that he will get the insurance transferred in his name within a couple of days(copy of insurance policy cum certificate is annexed as Annexure-B).That unfortunately on,25-03-2013 the car of the complainant was stolen from his house  and after failing to trace the vehicle, he informed concerned police about the theft of his case in writing, however, Police did not register FIR and told him that they will look into his complaint, however, when the concerned police even after repeated requests and lapse of more than five months did not register the FIR, complainant approached Ld.Sub-Judge (JMIC)Batote for direction to the concerned policy to lodge an FIR and the concerned police, on direction of Ld.Sub-Judge,Batote,thereafter registered an FIR No.85/2013  dated 15-08-2013 for offence U/S 379 RPC and started investigation  into the theft of car in question and after completion of the investigation, the concerned police submitted a final report to the competent court on,30-12-2013 as  “untraced. Complainant further submitted that he visited the office of OP1 at Jammu and apprised the Branch Manager of OP1 about the theft of car insured with OP1 and asked him about the claim amount of Rs.60,000/-.however, the Branch Manager of OP1 initially kept delaying the matter on one pretext or the other and told complainant to bring different documents with copy of FIR, Original insurance policy etc.and the complainant provided copy of FIR to OP1 ,but after completion of formalities, the OPs did not settle the claim of complainant. Constrained by the act of OPs .complainant served a legal notice to OP1 through his counsel and demanded the claim for the car insured under the policy bearing No.2311/52621115/00/800 issued by OP1,but OP1 did not take any step to redress the grievance of complainant and this act of OPs constitutes deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. Hence the present complaint. In the final analysis, complainant prays for indemnity to the tune of Rs.60,000/-and in addition also prays for compensation of Rs.2.20 lacs including litigation charges.

           On the other hand,OPs filed written version and resisted the complaint on the ground that the present complaint is hopelessly time barred by limitation,therefore,is not maintainable as such is required to be dismissed outrightly.It is submitted that cause of action accrued to complainant was on,16-05-2013 and the present complaint as well as the alleged claim has been filed much after the passing of limitation period provided under the Act, as well as, in the policy schedule. That the accidental vehicle was not insured with OP at the time of accident, but was insured much after the accident. That answering OPs are not liable to pay/indemnify the loss of accidental vehicle as the vehicle was lost due to negligence of army truck bearing No.06C078991P hit and since the loss falls under third party claim therefore, the claim of complainant lies before MACT under section 166/140 M.V.Act,but not under Consumer Protection Act.

                 Complainant adduced evidence by way of duly sworn evidence affidavit and affidavit of Aftab Ahmed.Complainant has placed on record copy of certificate of registration, copy of policy schedule, copy of Final Report, copy of FIR and copy of legal notice

                             Although OP1 filed written version, but after availing numerous opportunities failed to lead any evidence, so, the right of OP to file evidence was closed vide order dated, 29-11-2016.Therfore, unsubstantiated averments contained in the written version of OP cannot overweigh the evidence lead by the complainant.

               We have perused case file and heard L/Cs appearing for the parties at length.

                      Briefly stated case of complainant is that he had purchased car Maruti 800 bearing registration No.JK06-0577 from OP2,namely,Sanjay Gupta and subsequently the name of complainant was entered into the registration certificate by the competent authority on,20-03-2013,but soon after the transfer of registration certificate of car in his name,on,22-03-2015, he approached the agent of OP1 (Insurance Company),namely,Pawan Sharma to get his name entered in the Insurance Policy of vehicle in question. It is important to mention here that the OP2 who is the erstwhile owner of the vehicle in question, had purchased an Insurance Policy bearing No.2311/52621115/00/800 after paying the premium for the same for a sum assured of Rs.60,000/-and the said policy was issued for the period from 11-10-2012 to 10-10-2013.Complainant further submitted that the agent of OP1 took the particulars and assured him that he will get the insurance transferred in his name within a couple of days. That unfortunately on,25-03-2013 the car of the complainant was stolen from his house  and after failing to trace the vehicle, he informed concerned police about the theft of his case in writing, however, Police did not register FIR and told him that they will look into his complaint, however, when the concerned police even after repeated requests and lapse of more than five months did not register the FIR, complainant approached Ld.Sub-Judge (JMIC)Batote for direction to the concerned policy to lodge an FIR and the concerned police, on direction of Ld.Sub-Judge,Batote,thereafter registered an FIR No.85/2013  dated 15-08-2013 for offence U/S 379 RPC and started investigation  into the theft of car in question and after completion of the investigation, the concerned police submitted a final report to the competent court on,30-12-2013 as  “untraced. “Complainant further submitted that he visited the office of OP1 at Jammu and apprised the Branch Manager of OP1 about the theft of car insured with OP1 and asked him about the claim amount of Rs.60,000/-,however, the Branch Manager of OP1 initially kept delaying the matter on one pretext or the other and told complainant to bring different documents with copy of FIR, Original insurance policy etc.and the complainant provided copy of FIR to OP1 ,but after completion of formalities, the OPs did not settle the claim of complainant. Constrained by the act of OPs .complainant served a legal notice to OP1 through his counsel and demanded the claim for the car insured under the policy bearing No.2311/52621115/00/800 issued by OP1,but OP1 did not take any step to redress the grievance of complainant and this act of OPs constitutes deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.

                         On scanning the file, in our opinion the point which requires consideration is that as to whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of OP, in not indemnifying the complainant.

                         In order to substantiate his allegations, complainant filed duly sworn evidence affidavit and affidavit of Aftab Malik. Complainant and witness have reiterated the contents of complaint, therefore, same need no repetition. On the other hand, despite OP1 was granted ample opportunities to support its version by leading evidence, but it failed to lead iota of evidence in support of its version. Therefore, version of OP1 went unsubstantiated, unsupported and uncorroborated by cogent evidence, therefore, same being bereft of legal strength, hence, cannot be read in evidence.

                  On the other hand, in support of his allegations complainant has placed on record copy of certificate of registration, copy of certificate of insurance and copy of FIR. Therefore, we have no reason to discard with the prayer made by complainant for reimbursement of Rs.60,000/- in view of supportive material placed on record.

             After going through the whole case with the evidence on record what reveals here is the case of complainant is genuinely filed with speaking reasons and merit as being consumers as per the purport of Section 2(d) of Consumer Protection Act and OP1 is the service provider having failed in its statutory duty to provide adequate and effective services. The purport of legislation is well defined and statutorily takes care of consumer rights and cannot legally afford to a situation like the one confronted herewith in a manner where they are deprived of their rights as of consumers. The consumers have to come forth and seek for redressal of their grievance. The case of the complainant is also genuinely filed for seeking determination of his right by this Forum.

              It is however observed that the Insurance Company should not repudiate the claim of the policy holders on technical grounds as by repudiating the genuine insurance claims on such grounds looses the confidence of the policy holders on the Insurance Companies and it also gives rise to unnecessary litigation which in our opinion the Insurance Company should try to avoid the same.

                       Therefore, in view of the foregoing reasons the complaint filed by the complainant for redressal of his grievance is allowed and OP1 is directed to pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.60,000/-  i.e. sum assured alongwith interest @ 7% per annum w.e.f.17-03-2015(i.e. from the date of filing of this complaint) till its realisation. The complainant is also entitled to litigation charges of Rs.5000/-.The OP1 shall comply the order within two months from the date of receipt of this order, failing which awarded amount shall carry interest @ 12% from the date of default, till its realisation.Copy of this order be provided to both the parties as per requirement of the Act. On deposit of the amount in this Forum, the same shall be paid to the complainant through payees account cheque.The complaint is accordingly disposed of and file be consigned to records after its due compilation.

Order per President                                            (Khalil Choudhary)                               

Announced                                                           (Distt.& Sessions Judge)

11-09-2018                                                               President

                                                                            District Consumer Forum

Agreed by                                                                 Jammu.

                                                                

  Ms.Vijay Angral          

  Member                                                                                              

 

Mr.Ghulam Sarwar Chauhan

Member