Jharkhand

Bokaro

CC/18/1

Diwakar Kumar Rai - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s United India Insurance Co. Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

D.K. Mishra

10 Dec 2022

ORDER

          District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bokaro

Date of Filing-03-01-2018

Date of final hearing-10-12-2022

 Date of Order-10-12-2022

Case No. 01/2018

Diwakar Kumar Rai S/o- Ram Awatar Rai

 R/o- Chandrapura P.O.& P.S. Chandrapura, District- Bokaro

Vs.

M/s United India Insurance Co. Ltd.

Represented through Divisional manager,

Plot No. 17, City Centre, Sector-4, Bokaro SteelCity

                             Present:-

                             Shri Jai Prakash Narayan Pandey, President

          Smt. Baby Kumari, Member

 

PER- J.P.N Pandey, President

-Judgment-

             Complainant and O.P. are absent, non turned up on repeated call. It reveals from the record that this case is pending at the stage of argument in which both parties are absent, however written argument has already been filed earlier by the complainant.  Hence as per provision of Section 38 (3) (c) Consumer Protection Act. 2019 case has been taken up for decision on merit on the basis of materials available on record.

Complainant’s case in brief is that he is owner of truck bearing registration No. JH-09-R- 2739 which was insured with O.P. The insurance was valid from 24.10.2015 to 23.10.2016 for IDV value of Rs. 4,79,228/-. Further case is that on 02.04.2016 vehicle burnt due to short circuit for which Aus Gram Police Station was informed vide GDE No. 177 dt. 04.04.2016. Further case is that inspite of submission of all papers claim of the complainant has been repudiated by the O.P. on the ground that permit has been found fake at the time of accident, which was against the terms and conditions of the insurance policy. Further case is that inspite of report of surveyor claim has not been paid hence this case has been filed with prayer to pass order for direction to O.P. to pay Rs. 4,79,228/- with 12% interest from the date of accident and to pay Rs. 1,00,000/- as economic loss and to pay Rs. 1,00,000/- as compensation and Rs. 20,000/- as cost of the proceeding.

O.P. appeared and has filed W.S. mentioning therein that claim has been rightly repudiated because the permit submitted was found fake which was related to the accident period hence it was violation of the terms and conditions of the policy. Further reply is that as per information given by the complainant the vehicle was burnt due to short circuit and since vehicle was being run without valid permit hence claim has been rightly repudiated. Further reply is that on wrong information and claim this O.P. has expended Rs. 28055/- in verification of papers and preparation of survey report etc. and complainant himself has violated the terms and conditions of the policy hence his case is liable to be dismissed.                  

Now, point for decision is whether complainant is entitled to get relief as claimed?

On perusal of the papers annexed with the complaint petition it appears that Insurance policy is not in dispute. Photo copy of information given to the Police is also not in dispute. As per written information the occurrence of burning took place at Abhirampur Bazar and information was given to the Police on 04.04.2016. Ground for repudiation of claim is that vehicle was being plyed without valid road permit. O.P. has asserted that the permit which was submitted by the complainant was found fake on verification, hence claim has been repudiated. There is no any explanation by the complainant about this plea of O.P. that why and under which circumstance the vehicle concerned which was registered at Bokaro and the complainant who is resident of Bokaro was plying that very vehicle in the state of West Bengal without any valid permit. It appears that just to obtain compensation complainant has used fake permit which is a criminal act and such type of act is required to be discouraged. In light of above discussion we are of the view that repudiation of the claim of the complainant is correct and in accordance with the terms and conditions of the insurance policy and there is no any deficiency in service by the O.P.

Accordingly this case is being dismissed on merit and parties shall bear their own costs.

 

(J.P.N. Pandey)

                                                                                      President

                                                                                               

 

                                                                               (Baby Kumari)

•