State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
The New India Assurance Company Limited vs Karamjit Singh on 30 May, 2013
FIRST ADDITIONAL BENCH
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SECTOR 37-A, DAKSHIN MARG, CHANDIGARH.
First Appeal No.857 of 2009.
Date of Institution: 22.06.2009.
Date of Decision: 30.05.2013.
The New India Assurance Company Limited, Regional Office, SCO No.36-
37, Sector 17-A, Chandigarh, through its Manager.
.....Appellant.
Versus
Karamjit Singh S/o Sh. Paviter Singh, R/o Village Kandhargarh, Tehsil
Dhuri, District Sangrur.
...Respondent.
First Appeal against the order dated
14.05.2009 of the District Consumer
Disputes Redressal Forum, Sangrur.
Before:-
Shri Inderjit Kaushik, Presiding Judicial Member.
Shri Vinod Kumar Gupta, Member.
...................................
Present:- Sh. V. Ramswaroop, Advocate, counsel for the appellant.
Sh. Shiroop Dhaliwal, Advocate for Sh. Gaurav Sharma, Advocate, counsel for the respondent.
----------------------------------------
INDERJIT KAUSHIK, PRESIDING JUDICIAL MEMBER:-
The New India Assurance Company Limited, appellant/opposite party (In short "the appellant") has filed this appeal against the order dated 14.05.2009 passed by the learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Sangrur (in short "the District Forum").
2. Facts in brief are that Sh. Karamjit Singh, respondent/ complainant (hereinafter called as "the respondent") filed a complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (in short, "the Act") against the appellant, on the grounds that his car Accent CRDI bearing registration First Appeal No.857 of 2009 2 No.PB-13-B-0044 was comprehensively insured vide policy cover note no.081094 dated 14.05.2007 valid till 13.05.2008.
3. On 08.05.2008, the father of the respondent namely Sh. Paviter Singh was coming from Lehragaga to village Kandhargarh and when he reached in the area of Sunam near Chathe Nakte, a truck came from the opposite side and when the driver namely Jaspal Singh tried to save the car, hit against a tree and the car was damaged. Intimation was immediately given regarding the accident and DDR was lodged at P.S. Sunam. The respondent submitted the claim, but that was not decided. The respondent got the said car repaired from Bhagat Hyundai Workshop, Sangrur. The appellant put off the matter on one pretext or the other, but the claim has not been settled.
4. It was prayed that the appellant may be directed to pay Rs.2,28,300/- along with interest @ 18% p.a. from the date of accident ill realization, Rs.50,000/- as compensation and Rs.5500/- as litigation expenses.
5. In the written version filed on behalf of the appellant, preliminary objections were taken that the complaint is not maintainable and the appellant has not repudiated the claim so far. The respondent has no cause of action and he has not come to the District Forum with clean hands. The respondent is estopped by his act and conduct from filing the complaint. Complicated questions of facts and law are involved and the civil court is competent. The complaint deserves to be dismissed with special costs of Rs.10,000/-.
6. On merits, it was admitted that the car of the respondent bearing registration no.PB-13-B-0044 was insured with the appellant. As per the respondent, the alleged accident took place on 08.05.2008 and the matter was reported to the police on 31.05.2008, but no FIR was recorded. The insured removed the car from the spot without arranging the spot survey/photographs. The surveyor inspected the damaged vehicle at First Appeal No.857 of 2009 3 Bhagat Hyundai and since the loss was heavy, Sh. R.P. Bhasin was deputed for final survey. Surveyor R.P. Bhasin wrote a letter on 16.05.2008 to the insured to submit the claim related documents. Sh. Paviter Singh S/o Sher Singh got recorded the DDR no.15 dated 31.05.2008 in P.S. Sadar, Sunam, alleging that Jaspal Singh was driving the car. In fact, the car was being driven by Paviter Singh himself and he was not having the driving licence and he concocted the story to get the claim. The surveyor conducted the inquiry and came to know that Sh. Paviter Singh was driving the car at the time of accident and suffered injuries on his person and remained bed ridden for two months. In the said accident, Sadik Din S/o Kaku Khan also suffered injuries and both of them were admitted in Civil Hospital, Sangrur on 08.05.2008 and Paviter Singh was shifted to surgical ward on 09.05.2008. Jaspal Singh gave in writing that Sh. Paviter Singh was driving the car.
7. The claim form submitted was incomplete. Even the column of the name of the driver was left blank. The respondent was asked to send the complete form, but the same was not submitted. The matter was reported to the police after 22 days of loss. Paviter Singh has nowhere stated that the car was being driven by him at the time of accident. Jaspal Singh admitted that he was sitting on the rear seat of the car and the car was being driven by Paviter Singh. In these circumstances, the claim was not settled.
8. The respondent was asked vide letter dated 16.05.2008 to submit the original registration book for verification, driving licence in original, claim form duly filled and signed, details of injuries sustained etc., but the respondent failed to comply. Even the car was dismantled without any survey and without submitting any estimate of loss to the insurance company. The respondent was asked vide various letters to submit the documents, but no reply was filed. The respondent himself got the vehicle repaired from Bhagat Hyundai, Sangrur and is not entitled to First Appeal No.857 of 2009 4 reimbursement of the alleged amount of Rs.2,28,300/-. The respondent has never visited the appellant for settlement of the claim and has not approached the District Forum with clean hands. All other allegations were denied and it was prayed that the complaint may be dismissed with costs.
9. Parties led evidence in support of their respective contentions by way of affidavits and documents.
10. After going through the documents and material placed on file and after hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the learned District Forum observed that it is proved that Jaspal Singh was driving the car in question, who was having a valid driving licence. Surveyor report Ex.R-3 and Ex.R-4 also prove the same. The respondent was not intimated even about the repudiation or rejection of the claim after the surveyor report. The surveyor submitted the final report on 16.09.2008, but the appellant had no intention to deal with the matter. The survey report Ex.R-3 is not pleaded in the complaint and no affidavit o the surveyor was filed and the same cannot be relied. As per repair bill Ex.C-7, the repairs were carried out from the authorized agent and the same cannot be ignored. The complaint was allowed and the appellant was directed to pay Rs.2,28,300/- along with interest w.e.f. final survey report dated 16.09.2008 till realization and to pay Rs.5,000/- as litigation expenses.
11. Aggrieved by the impugned order dated 21.05.2013, the appellant has come up in appeal.
12. We have gone through the pleadings of the parties, perused the record of the learned District Forum and have perused the written arguments filed on behalf of the appellant as well as heard the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the respondent.
13. In the written arguments filed on behalf of the appellant, it was submitted that it was a specific case of the appellant that the accident took place on 08.05.2008 and the matter was reported to the police on 31.05.2008 and the DDR no.15 dated 31.05.2008 was registered at Police First Appeal No.857 of 2009 5 Station, Sunam. There is a delay in reporting the matter. The surveyor appointed inspected the vehicle at Bhagat Hyundai Workshop and due to heavy loss, Sh. R.P. Bhasin & Co. was deputed as final surveyor, who asked the respondent to submit the claim related documents. The respondent submitted the claim form, but the same was incomplete. The statements made by Paviter Singh and Jaspal Singh are contradictory. Various letters were sent to submit the documents, but the same were not submitted. Affidavits Ex.R-1 and Ex.R-2, survey report Ex.R-4, statements of Jaspal Singh and Paviter Singh Ex.R-5 and Ex.R-6, letters Ex.R-14 to Ex.R-18 prove that the respondent was not cooperating and the order is liable to be set aside. The points raised in the written arguments filed by the appellant were not discussed by the District Forum and the complaint was wrongly allowed. There was a difference of Rs.1.20 lacs in the survey report and the repair bill. In the event of loss, the claim was not payable in toto, but after deductions mentioned in the policy. The District Forum wrongly ignored the investigation report Ex.R-4. It was prayed that the appeal may be accepted and the impugned order under appeal may be set aside.
14. On the other hand, the counsel for the respondent has contended that the impugned order passed by the District Forum is legal and valid and there is no ground to interfere with the same and the appeal may be dismissed.
15. We have considered the respective submissions of the parties and have minutely scrutinized the entire record.
16. The accident took place on 08.05.2008, but the matter was not reported to the police immediately and it was reported vide DDR Ex.C-8 on 31.05.2008. As per the DDR, Jaspal Singh was driving the vehicle. Investigation was conducted by Bee Vee Investigation Agency and the report dated 17.09.2008 is Ex.R-4 and in that, in the conclusion, it was confirmed that Accent CRDI car bearing No.PB-13-P-0044 met with an First Appeal No.857 of 2009 6 accident on 08.05.2008 and as per the statement of the driver Jaspal Singh, he was sitting on the rear seat of the car and the car was being driven by Paviter Singh at the time of accident. The insured and driver have tried to play fraud with the insurance company to obtain undue benefit under the policy. Statements of Sh. Jaspal Singh and Paviter Singh are Ex.R-5 and Ex.R-6 and the admission record is Ex.R-7 as per which, Sadik Deen was admitted in Civil Hospital, Sangrur. Ex.R-8 is the survey report of Sh. R.P. Bhasin & Company as per which, name of the driver was Jaspal Singh S/o Darshan Singh. He assessed the loss, but excluding the parts not covered under the insurance, to the tune of Rs.1,02,682-96p.
17. The District Forum has relied upon the repair bill issued by Bhagat Hyundai Ex.C-7 as per which, the total repair amount was Rs.2,22,308. This bill includes those parts which were not covered under the insurance, but the District Forum has allowed the entire amount of the repair bill, which is not correct. The surveyor has assessed the loss correctly and has reduced the amount of the parts which were not covered under the insurance. The order of the District Forum requires modification.
18. In view of above discussion, the appeal filed by the appellant is partly accepted and the impugned order under appeal dated 14.05.2009 passed by the District Forum is modified and the respondent is held entitled to a sum of Rs.1,02,682-96p as assessed by the surveyor vide report Ex.R-8, along with interest @ 7.5% p.a. w.e.f. the date of the final survey report i.e. 16.09.2008 till realization. The remaining part of the impugned order is affirmed and upheld. With this modification, the appeal stands disposed of.
19. The appellant had deposited an amount of Rs.25,000/- with this Commission at the time of filing of the appeal. This amount with interest accrued thereon, if any, be remitted by the registry to the respondent/ complainant by way of a crossed cheque/demand draft after the expiry of 45 days under intimation to the learned District Forum and to the appellant. First Appeal No.857 of 2009 7
20. Remaining amount shall be paid by the appellant to the respondent/complainant within 45 days of the receipt of copy of the order.
21. The arguments in this appeal were heard on 21.05.2013 and the order was reserved. Now the order be communicated to the parties.
22. The appeal could not be decided within the stipulated timeframe due to heavy pendency of court cases.
(Inderjit Kaushik) Presiding Judicial Member (Vinod Kumar Gupta) Member May 30, 2013.
(Gurmeet S)