BEFORE THE DIST.CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KHURDA, BHUBANESWAR:

                                                -ooOoo-     

C.D.CASE NO. 203/2014

Shishira Chhualsingh,  aged about 40 years,

S/o – Rama Chandra Chuualasingh of village – Gopinathpur,PO – Olasingh, PS – Begunia, Dist – Khurda

                                                                   ….     Complainant

          -Vrs.-

1. Cholamandalam  Investment & Finance Company Ltd.,

(Formerly known as Cholamandalam DBS Finance Ltd.),

Dare House,  2,  NSC Bose Road, Parrys,Chennai-600 001,

Through its Managing Director.  

     2.  Cholamandalam  Investment & Finance Company Ltd.,

(Formerly known as Cholamandalam DBS Finance Ltd.),

Bhubaneswar Branch,  Lewis Road, Bhubaneswar,

          Dist  - Khurda,  through its Branch Manager. 

3. Future Generalli India  Insurance Company Ltd.,

001, Trade Plaza, 414,

Veer Savarkar Marg, Prabhadevi, Mumbai – 400025,

Through its Managing Director.

4. Future Generalli India Insurance Company Ltd.,

Bhubaneswar Branch, 1^st Floor, Kalinga Complex, Plot No.13, Unit -1, Rajpath, Bhubaneswar- 751009, through its Branch Manager.

                                                                   ….     Opp. Parties

For the complainant      …      Sri K.C.Prusty (Adv.) 

For the O.P Nos. 1 & 2  …     Sri D.P.Tripathy  & Associates (Adv.)

For the OPs.3 & 4                   …      Mr.B.R.Mishra  & Associates

Date of filing : 28/06/2014

Date of disposal : 24/05/2022

ORDER

B.R.SWAIN, MEMBER :

1.       The case has been filed by the complainant U/s 12 of the C.P.Act, 1986.

2.       Brief fact of the case is that,  the complainant intended to purchase a TATA ACE vehicle and for which he took financial assistance from OPs 1 & 2. The Ops 1 & 2 disbursed a loan of Rs.2,72,510/- and as per the hypothecation agreement the complainant had to repay the loan along with interest in 46 installments started from May,2011 till February, 2015. The said vehicle bearing registration No.OR-02-BS-4775 was insured by the Future Generalli Insurance Company Ltd., the OP Nos. 3 & 4. During the subsistence  of the insurance policy the vehicle was met with an accident on dated 24/02/2012 resulting severe damage to the vehicle. The complainant shifted the vehicle to Trupti  Enerprisers (P) Ltd. and an amount of Rs.2,12,245/- was estimated  for repair of the damaged vehicle vide Annexure -4. Thereafter to complainant brought to the notice of the OPs regarding the occurrence and made a claim before the OP Nos. 3 & 4, who did not take any step for the repair of the damaged vehicle by paying repair charges and the vehicle was under the custody of the Trupti Enterprisers. As the complainant  could not able to ply the vehicle to earn his livelihood as a result of which, he defaulted to make payment of the EMIs to the Financier i.e. OP Nos. 1 & 2 for which they send loan recall notice  to the complainant for recovery of the outstanding  dues against the complainant.  Hence this case.

 3.      The OP Nos. 1 & 2   filed their   written version challenging  the maintainability of the case against them. It is contended that in accordance to the Arbitration clause  & Arbitration and Conciliation Act, the OPs 1 & 2 preferred an arbitration proceeding vide 854/2014 where arbitration award has already been passed. The complainant very cunningly filed the present consumer complaint by suppressing the material facts. So the complainant  has no locu-standi to file  this case, hence the OPs 1 & 2 prayed for dismissal of the case.

          Upon notice,  the OP Nos.3 & 4  have also filed their  written version stating therein that, after getting information regarding the accidental damages caused to the insured’s vehicle, the Insurance Company immediately appointed the surveyor and as per the  survey report and from the FIR as submitted by the complainant it reveals that seven un-authorized passengers were travelling in the insured’s vehicle  at the time of alleged accident. So there was clear cut violation of policy  conditions and for which the OPs 3 & 4 strictly denied the liability and rightly repudiated the claim of the complainant.

4.       We have heard at length the learned counsels for both sides and perused the record, which reveals that an Arbitration award has already been passed in respect of the loan agreement No.XVFPBNR00000 578680 prior to this present case filed by the complainant. During the course of hearing of the case, the learned counsel for the OPs 1 & 2 submitted that  as the arbitration award has been passed, this Commission has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint against them after passing of the arbitration award. It is well settled that once the arbitration award passed, the Dist. C.D.R. Commission lacks jurisdiction to adjudicate the matter pending before it. In view of the above settled legal position, the complaint petition against the OPs 1 & 2 become in-fructuous.

5.       As regards the insurance claim in respect of the damaged vehicle in question, the learned counsel for the OPs 3 & 4 submitted that the Insurance Company can not indemnify the amount demanded by the insured. As such the complainant was in contravention of general policy exception/ violation of conditions. So the Insurance Company i.e. OPs 3 & 4 are not liable for any loss. After going through details about the liabilities  of the Insurance Company from the policy terms and conditions, we do not feel it proper that the insurance company can escape from paying the insurance claim amount in respect of the damaged vehicle in question for this present accidental case. Considering the above facts & circumstances, we are of the view that the complainant is entitled to get the amount as per the final surveyor of the Insurance Company who assessed the net loss to the tune of Rs.1,44,500/- after deduction of salvage values and depreciation cost of the damaged vehicle.  Hence it is ordered.   

ORDER

The complaint is hereby dismissed on contest against the OP Nos.1 & 2  being in-fructuous and  allowed on contest against the OP Nos. 3 & 4.  The  OP Nos. 3 & 4   are  hereby directed to pay Rs.1,44,500/-  (Rupees one lakh fofty-four thousand  five hundred ) only  to the complainant towards insurance claim under the policy along with interest @ 9% per annum thereon from the date of filing of this case till the date of payment. The OP Nos.3 & 4  are further  directed to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/-   (Rupees ten thousand) only to the complainant  towards compensation for mental agony & harassment  suffered by him and a further sum of Rs.5000/-  (Rupees five thousand) only towards litigation expenses.  The order be complied with by the  3 & 4   within thirty days from the date of communication of this order, failing which the complainant will be  at liberty to execute the order  against the OP Nos. 3 & 4    in accordance with law.

The order is pronounced on this day the  24^th May,  2022  under the seal & signature of the President and Members  of the Commission.

                                                                                                                                                                                                   MEMBER

  (B.R.SWAIN) 

Dictated & corrected by me

           Member

I agree                                                                            I agree        

 Member (W)                                                                 President

(S.TRIPATHY)                                                             (K.C.RATH)

Transcribed by Smt.M.Kanungo, Sr.Steno :