By Sri. MOHANDASAN.K, PRESIDENT
1.The complaint in short is as follows:-
The complainant is the registered owner of KL-10-AH-5112 Maruthi Alto K10 Car. The vehicle stands insured by the opposite party vide Policy No.1010043117P 105766414 from 21/07/2017 to 20/07/2018. The vehicle dashed against an electrical post on the way from Perintalmanna to Koppam and the electricity Board sustained loss of Rs. 24,189/- (Rupees Twenty four thousand one hundred and eighty nine only). The complainant remitted the amount before the Electricity Board and substituted electric post. Thereafter the complainant approached the opposite party since the accident/took place during the validity period of insurance policy. But the opposite party refused to accept the claim form and said that it is not the duty of the Insurance Company but the complainant has to meet the expense. The complainant remitted the amount on 27/11/2017 before the Electricity board. The opposite party directed complainant to get an order from any Court for the reimbursement of the amount. The complainant alleges that the act of the opposite party amounts deficiency in service and thereby opposite party denied the legal right of the complainant. The complainant sustained financial loss as well as mental agony. So the prayer of the complainant is to refund the amount of Rs.24189/-(Rupees Twenty four thousand one hundred and eighty nine only) along with compensation of Rs. 25,000/-(Rupees Twenty five thousand only) and Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) as cost of proceedings.
2. On admission of the complaint notice issued to the opposite party and on receipt of notice the opposite party entered appearance and filed detailed version denying the entire averments and allegations contained in the complaint. The opposite party admitted that the vehicle was insured with them for the period 21/07/2017 to 20/07/2018. But the opposite party denied the entire averments in the complaint that the accident was occurred, that the opposite party did not accept claim form, the complainant intimated the incident to the opposite party and that the opposite party denied the right of the complainant without giving compensation. The contention of the opposite party is that the claim on the basis of the policy is exclusively within the jurisdictional limit of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. The opposite party also contented that they were not aware of accident since no information was given to the opposite party and not even mentioned the date of incident in the complaint. The contention of the opposite party is that the allegation is false and fictitious since no records like FIR , Scene Mahassar has produced by the complainant. The opposite party has contented that the allegation that they did not accept claim form is absolutely false and only stated for the purpose of this complaint. The opposite party came to know about the complaint only when the petition was received from the Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission. The complainant has not produced proper records before the opposite party to establish the claim of the complainant. If that was done by the complainant, the opposite party could have conducted proper survey and also could have assessed loss which would have made the payment to the Electricity Board. The complainant has not done anything as per law and there is no cause of action as alleged by the complainant. The contention of the opposite party that, as per the clause in the policy document, the insured should not make or promise any payment to a third party without the prior consent of the insurer. So the complainant is not entitled for any relief from the opposite party. The liability of the opposite party is to pay only to third parties for the damages occurred during this policy period.
3. The complainant and opposite party filed affidavit and documents. The complainant’s side documents marked as Ext. A1 to A3. Ext.A1 is series of bills issued by the KSEB dated 27/11/2017,Ext.A2 is a certificate issued by Assistant Engineer, KSEB Electrical Section Koppam dated 27/11/2017, Ext. A3 is a photocopy of RC copy. The opposite party produced document and it is marked as Ext.B1. Ext. B1 is Certificate of Insurance in respect of policy No.1010043117P105766414 valid from 21/07/2017 to 20/07/2018.
4. Heard sides, perused affidavits and documents and also Notes of arguments. Following points arise for consideration:-
- Whether there is deficiency of service on the part of opposite party?
- Relief and cost.
5. Point No.1 &2
The grievance of the complainant is that though the vehicle was insured with the opposite party, the opposite party refused to even accept a claim form out of an accident met with his vehicle. The complainant was driving the car from Perintalmanna side to Koppam and while he reached at the place of incident at Chanthapadi, the vehicle dashed against an electric post. The Electricity Board assessed the loss as Rs. 24,189/-(Rupees Twenty four thousand one hundred and eighty nine only). The complainant approached the opposite party, but the opposite party refused to accept the claim form. Thereafter the complainant remitted the amount before the Electricity Board and then he approached the Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission for the reimbursement of the said amount with compensation and cost.
6. The contention of the opposite party is that the complainant never approached
the opposite party and there was no incident of refusal of claim Form. The opposite party also contented that if the complainant approached the opposite party with documents like FIR,MVI report and other documents they could have deputed a surveyor for the assessment and thereby they could have given the amount to the Electricity Board. It can be seen that the opposite party has admitted issuance of policy with third party liability.
7. In this complaint the complainant produced documents Ext.A1 to A3. Ext. A1 is receipts for the money issued by the electricity board to the complainant and Ext. A2 is a Certificate of Assistant Engineer Electrical Section, Koppam issued to the complainant. The Ext.A2 document says that vehicle No.KL-10-AH-5112 dashed against an electric post at Karinganad, chandhapady, Koppam-Peritalmanna road under Koppam Electrical Section and an amount of Rs.24189/-(Rupees Twenty four thousand one hundred and eighty nine only) was deposited towards changing the damaged pole by Sri. Arun S/o Krishnan, Anupama Nivas , Kappil -PO, Wandoor, Nilambur on 27/11/2017. It is also stated that whole amount has utilized for changing the damaged post and certificate issued for submitting before the Insurance Authorities. The Ext.A2 document also reveals the different counts of expenses. So it can be seen that the vehicle owned by the complainant dashed against an electric post and the Electricity Department received an amount of Rs. 24,189/-(Rupees Twenty four thousand one hundred and eighty nine only) from complainant and utilized for changing the damaged pole. It may be right that the complainant has not produced documents like FIR, Scene Mahassar etc to establish the accident . But the certificate issued by the Electricity Board which is marked as Ext. A2 clearly reveals the contention of the complaint as real one. The contention of the opposite party cannot be accepted that the complainant did not approach the opposite party for the reimbursement at any point of time. The contention of opposite party is that they came to know about the incident only on receipt of notice from the Commission cannot be accepted at any rate. We accept the averment of the complaint that the opposite party refused to receive the claim form in this complaint. If that being fact there is sufficient reason to hold there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. The fact remains that the complainant has not produce FIR, Scene Mahassar etc before this Commission. That doesn’t mean the accident was not occurred. There is sufficient reason to infer that nobody was injured in the incident and so the FIR might have not registered. From the narration of the complaint the only aggrieved person is the Electricity board. It is to be noted that the registration of the FIR is not mandatory for providing insurance coverage as per the terms of the policy.
8. The opposite party has got a contention the third party liability can be offered only to a third party, not to the complainant and as per the provisions of insurance policy the complainant is barred from settling the issue with a third party on behalf of insurance company. If the contention of the opposite party is accepted the procedure to be followed is that the electricity board has to file a complaint before the statutory authority and on that basis the compensation has to be given. According to opposite party on receipt of proper claim they will depute the surveyor and assess the compensation. But in this case it can be seen that the complainant without any delay approached the opposite party, but they refused to entertain the claim and thereby the complainant was constrained to remit the cost of replacement of electric pole directly. The complainant remitted the amount before the electricity board and they have given Ext.A2 document which clearly explaining the details of the expenses incurred by them. We do not find any reason to discard the Ext.A2. In the circumstances we find that there is deficiency on the side of the opposite party and the complainant is entitled for the insured amount and also for compensation for the deficiency in service on the part of opposite party. Hence the Commission allows the complaint as follows:-
- The opposite party is directed to pay an amount of Rs. 24,189/-(Rupees Twenty four thousand one hundred and eighty nine only) to the complainant on account of cost paid by the complainant for changing the damaged pole.
- The opposite party is directed to pay Rs. 5000/-(Rupees Five thousand only) as compensation for the deficiency in service on the part of opposite party and thereby caused inconveniences and hardships to the complainant.
- The opposite party is also directed to pay Rs. 3000/-(Rupees Three thousand only) as cost of the proceedings.
The opposite party shall comply this order within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order, failing which the complainant is entitled for interest at
the rate of 12% per annum on the above said amount of Rs.32,189/-(Rupees Thirty two thousand one hundred and eight nine only) from the date of receipt of the copy of this order till realisation.
Dated this 3rd day of January, 2022.
