State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
National Insurance Company Limited vs Jagdish Rana on 20 September, 2010
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA PANCHKULA First Appeal No.656 of 2006 Date of Institution: 08.03.2006 Date of Decision: 20.09.2010 National Insurance Company Limited, Regional Office II, SCO 337-340, Sector-35-B, Chandigarh through Bimal Tandon, Senior Assistant. ..Appellant/Opp. Party Versus Jagdish Rana Retd. D.S.P. s/o Sh.Amar Singh r/o House No.1313, Urban Estate, Jind. .....Respondent/Complainant BEFORE: Honble Mr.Justice R.S.Madan, President. Dr.Rekha Sharma, Member. Sh.Diwan Singh Chauhan, Member. For the Parties: None for the appellant. Mr.Anirudh Kush Advocate for the respondent. ORDER
JUSTICE R.S.MADAN PRESIDENT:
Challenge in this appeal is to the order dated 13.01.2006 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Jind whereby while accepting the complaint of the respondent-complainant, following relief was granted:-
.Hence, we are of the considered view that the opposite party has wrongly repudiated the claim of complainant. By repudiated the claim, the opposite party has rendered deficient services. In our view the complainant is entitled for the claim as per survey report which after deducting the salvage value of Rs.15,000/- comes to Rs.62,000/-. Hence, we direct the opposite party to pay the above said sum of Rs.62,000/- along with interest @ 9% p.a. from 6.5.2003 till realization to the complainant. The opposite party is further directed to pay Rs.3000/- (three thousand) as litigation expenses to the complainant. The order be complied within two months. Accordingly the present complaint stands disposed off.
The brief facts of the present case are that the complainant had got insured his Maruti Car No.DL-3CL-1392 Model 1997 from the appellant-opposite party vide cover note No.31/632616 w.e.f. 30.9.2002 to 29.9.2003 for a sum of Rs.77,500/-. Unfortunately during the subsistence of the insurance policy on 16.2.2003, the vehicle in question met with an accident with a dumper No.HR-39-7539. F.I.R. No.43 dated 16.2.2003 under Section 304-A,279,337 IPC was recorded in Police Station Sadar, Jind. Necessary intimation was given to the insurance company. The complainant submitted his claim with the appellant-opposite party. However, the opposite party repudiated the claim of complainant on the ground that the driver of the vehicle was under the influence of liquor at the time of accident and also that there were six persons were traveling in the Maruti car against the capacity of four persons. Further ground for repudiation of the claim was taken that the car was fitted with L.P.G. Cylinder whereas the car in question was a petrol fuel used vehicle. Alleging it a case of deficiency of service and unfair trade practice, the complainant invoked the jurisdiction of the District Forum by filing the present complaint.
Upon notice the opposite parties appeared and resisted the claim of the complainant on the grounds mentioned above and prayed for dismissal of complaint.
Both the parties led evidence in support of their respective claims.
On appraisal of the pleadings of the parties and evidence adduced on record, the District Forum accepted the complaint and granted relief as noticed in the opening para of this order.
Hence this appeal.
There is no appearance on behalf of appellant-opposite party at the time of argument. We have heard learned counsel for the respondent-complainant and perused the grounds of appeal and other documents produced on record.
From the perusal of documents i.e. Ex.OP-4, Ex.OP-6 to OP-12, Ex.OP-14 to OP-18, available on the record it is clearly proved that the complainant is not entitled for any insurable benefits. No specific endorsement has been made on the registration certificate of the vehicle that the vehicle is question was registered as LPG vehicle. Further the Maruti car-800 was having its sitting capacity of four persons whereas at the time of alleged accident six persons were traveling in the said vehicle. The entire evidence produced by the appellant-opposite party clearly proves that the complainant has violated the terms and conditions of the insurance policy as is evident from Ex.OP-6 which is reproduced as under:-
Divisional Office-1 CHROII.TECH.MT:03 Rohtak 11.4.03 Kind Attn: Sh.H.C.CHANDHA, DM,DO I Rohtak.
Ref: Loss DT.16.2.03 Due to accident of vehicle No. DL-3CL-1392 Maruti-800 under Policy No.420605/31/02/6104375 A/C Mr.Jagdish Rana.
Reference your letter dt. 4.4.2003 along with a claim docket, we have observed that as per RC of the car (photocopy placed at serial No.7), the fuel used is petrol but the spot survey report dated 27.2.2003 carried out by M/s Grover Associates of Jind (refer sheet 4. para No.3 under the head VIOLATIONS OBSERVED) and the photographs taken by the spot surveyor depict and reveal that the vehicle at the material time was fitted with on LPG kit also.
It appears to be the violation of provisions of Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 read with the instructions contained in Govt. of India, Ministry of Road Transport and National Highways Circular letter dt. 12.7.2002, addressed to Transport Secretaries/Commissioners of all states/UTs and Home Secretary of Govt. of Tamilnadu (copy enclosed for ready reference).
As such your claim docket is being returned herewith for your doing the needful on merits.
Copies of news clipping which may be of your interest on the subject are also enclosed hereto.
Please acknowledge.
Sd/-
(Ramesh Mohan) Dy.Manager Further Ex.OP-15 i.e. the preliminary motor survey report dated 27.2.2003 submitted by Grover Associates has supported the version of the appellant-opposite party justifying the repudiation of the claim of the complainant. The relevant portion of which is reproduced as under:-1
2..
3..
4.
5.
6.
7. NATURE & CAUSE OF ACCIDENT As is known to all in Jind and as per press reports (cuttings enclosed) the passengers in this car had gone in a marriage party in village Ghimana and had gone to Bibipur and consumer alcohol and were waiving the bottles in their hands and the car was in speed which rammed into a truck straight in front, as such it got badly damaged.
8. 9
XXXXXX XXXXXX VIOLATIONS OBSERVED/EVIDENT IN THIS ACCIDENT
1. SEATING CAPACITY-
As against the seating capacity of 3+1 there were 6 passengers.
2. INFLUENCE OF LIQUOR-
Apparently all the occupants including driver were under the influence of liquors and waiving bottles and enjoying and that resulted into extra-ordinary speed of the car and smashing straight in right front of the said truck.
3. L.P.GAS ASPECT-
The car is fitted with the LP Gas Kit and in the Dicky ehrere are Gas Cylinder Belts and all these items have been depicted in the fotos snapped by us.
4. HIRE & REWARD Aspect is also attracted and presumably the car was hired for the marriage party as the driver and occupants belongs to two villages and three persons in this car are reported to be having profession of drivers.
Sd/-
For Grover Associates, Jind.
Having taken into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and the documents available on record, we are of the view that it is a clear cut case of violations of the terms and conditions of the insurance policy. The District Forum has committed great error while accepting the complaint of the complainant and as such the impugned order under challenge is not sustainable in the eyes of law.
Accordingly this appeal is accepted, the impugned order is set aside and the complaint is dismissed.
20th Sep, 2010 Justice R.S.Madan President Dr.Rekha Sharma, Member.
Diwan Singh Chauhan, Member.