BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM ::
KADAPA Y.S.R DISTRICT
PRESENT SRI V.C. GUNNAIAH, B.Com., M.L., PRESIDENT
SMT. K. SIREESHA, LADY MEMBER
Tuesday, 22nd December 2015
CONSUMER COMPLAINT No. 76 / 2015
1. Devireddy Rama Subbamma,
W/o Late Devireddy Pedda Gopal Reddy, aged about 40 years.
2. Devireddy Gopal Krishna Reddy, S/o Late Devireddy Pedda Gopal Reddy,
aged about 23 years
3. Devireddy Sarswathi Devi, D/o Late Devireddy Pedda Gopal Reddy,
aged about 20 years.
4. Murali Krishna Reddy, S/o Late Devireddy Pedda Gopal Reddy,
aged about 19 years
All are residing at D.No. 1/145, Parvathipuram Village,
Sidhout Mnadal, YSR District ….. Complainants.
Vs.
The Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Company Ltd.,
Rep. by its Branch Manager, Beside Sri Durga Automotives,
Mahendra Dealers, Almaspet,
Kadapa city – 516 001 YSR District. ….. Respondent
This complaint coming on this day for final hearing on 15-12-2015 in the presence of Sri S. Nagi Reddy, Advocate for complainant and Sri D. Rajasekhar Reddy, Advocate for respondent and upon perusing the material papers on record, the Forum made the following:-
O R D E R
(Per Smt. K. Sireesha, Member),
1. Complaint filed under section 12 & 14 R/w Section 2 (1) (i) (iii) and (G) of the C.P. Act 1986.
2. The brief facts of the complaint are as follows:- It is submitted that all the complainants are legal heirs to the Devireddy Pedda gopal Reddy. Complainant No. 1 is the wife of Devi Reddy Pedda Gopal Reddy and the rest of the complainants are the children of the Devi Reddy Pedda Gopal Reddy, the said Devi Reddy Pedda Gopal Reddy is the owner of the tractor bearing No. AP 04 Y : 7951 trailer AP 04 T : 7952 was duly insured with the respondent policy bearing No. BOCO1045600002, the policy commences from 29-6-2013 to 28-6-2014, the said Devi Reddy Pedda Gopal Reddy was travelling in his tractor to shift the mud from Vontimitta tank to the fields on 18-3-2014 the driver of the tractor drove the vehicle in a negligent manner with high speed lost the control of the tractor trailer and turtle the vehicle, in result Devi Reddy Pedda Gopal Reddy who was sitting in the trailer sustained severe injuries. Immediately phoned to the 108 ambulance by others, they came and took the injured Devi Reddy Pedda Gopal Reddy to the RIMS hospital, Kadapa the injured shifted to the Tirupathi Rama Devi Super Specialty Hospital, he died in the hospital in this regard the brother of the Devireddy Raja Gopal Reddy who was travelling in the said tractor along with Devireddy Pedda Rajagopal Reddy lodged a complaint to the Vintimitta P.S. They registered the case as crime No. 26/2014. After due investigation the police laid charge sheet against the driver of the tractor.
3. The complainants submits that the deceased Devireddy Pedda Raja Gopal Reddy has taken a policy to the tractor trailer from the respondent and policy number BOCO1045600002 and it is valid from 29-6-2013 to 28-6-2014. The said Devireddy Pedda Rajagopal Reddy has taken P.a. and paid premium of ₹ 100/- to the respondent company as such after the death of him, all the complainants are entitled to receive the compensation of ₹ 2,00,000/- from the respondent the driver who caused the accident as got valid driving license, the complaints issued a registered post legal notice to the respondent on 17-5-2015 and it was served to the respondent on 20-5-2015 demanding to pay the assured amount of ₹ 2,00,000/- which covers risk of the owner of the vehicle i.e. P.a. But the respondent even till today not paid any amount the complainants. In spite of valid notice. Hence, the complainant is constrained to file this present complaint.
4. Therefore, the complainants pray that the Hon’ble court may be pleased to pass order in favour of the complainants against the respondent for the following reliefs (a) direct the respondent to pay the claim complainants of ₹ 2,00,000/- to the complainants with interest at the rate of 24% p.a. from the date of accident i.e. from 18-3-2014 to till realization, (b) direct the respondent to pay ₹ 5,000/- towards cost of complaint and also direct for such other and further reliefs as such the Hon’ble forum deems fit and proper under the circumstances of the case.
5. Counter filed by the respondent that the complaint is not maintainable in the eyes of law and hence, the same is liable to be dismissed. All the allegations made in complaint are denied intoto unless specifically admitted herein. It is submitted that in view of cause of action not being arisen within the jurisdiction of this Hon’ble forum instant complaint is liable to be dismissed. Without prejudice to the above said it is further submitted that the complainant had taken a motor policy No. VOCO141560000102 in respect of Mahindra Tractor bearing No. AP 04 Y : 7951 valid from 29-6-2013 to 28-7-2014 subject to terms and conditions issued therein. A copy of the policy and its terms are marked as Exhibit – 1.
6. It is submitted that it is the version of the complainant that on 18-3-2014 since deceased Devireddy Pedda Gopal Reddy was travelling in the alleged tractor No. AP 04 Y : 7951 and that the driver of the alleged tractor is said to have steered the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner lost control and the alleged tractor trailer lost control turtled. Due to the impact, the complainant is said to have sustained grievous injuries and succumbed to his injuries at the hospital. The legal heirs of the complainant had made a personal accident claim a copy of the claim form is marked as Ex.2.
7. It is further submitted that, the insured Late Devireddy Pedda Gopal Reddy was not holding valid driving license as on the date of accident. The deceased was not holding a transport endorsement to drive the insured vehicle. Further the complainant has not given or produced any cogent evidence to substantiate that he was possessing a valid driving license as on the date of accident. The relevant details of the driving license and the registration certificate is mentioned below for the kind reference of Hon’ble forum which shows that the driver late Devireddy Pedda Gopal Reddy not having valid driving license and it is a commercial vehicle. The copy of the B-extract is marked as Ex.3 and copy of the driving license is marked as Ex. 4.
8. It is submitted that the insured Devireddy Pedda Gopal Reddy was not holding valid driving license as on the date of accident which amounts to the violation of the policy condition section IV (4) (c) the company is not bound to go beyond the scope of the policy conditions to pay the claim. It may be noted in Oriental insurance Co. Ltd., Vs. Sony Cheriyan reported in (1999) 6 SCC 451 it was held that the insured cannot claim anything more than what is covered by the insurance policy. Therefore, the above said reasons the complaint deserves to be dismissed with costs.
9. On the basis of the above pleadings the following points are settled for determination.
- Whether the complainant is eligible for compensation or not?
ii. Whether there is negligence or deficiency of service on the
part of the Respondents or not?
iii. To what relief?
10. On behalf of complainant Exs. A1 to A9 were marked and behalf of the respondent Exs. B1 to B4 were marked.
11. Point Nos. 1 & 2. As per Ex. A1 it is true that the accident was occurred on 18-3-2014. Exs. A2, A3, A4 and A5 supports the same. Ex. A6 family members certificate of the deceased Devireddy Pedda Gopal Reddy. As per Ex. A7 it is very clear that the deceased had taken policy for agricultural purpose also. It is very clear in the limitations as to use the policy as per terms and conditions of the policy bond. The policy covers only for agricultural and foresty purposes under Ex. A7. The policy was in force at the time of accident i.e. d18-3-2014 validity of the policy from 29-6-2013 to 28-6-2014. As per evidence on record and documentary evidence filed by the complainant it is very clear that the complainants are eligible for compensation as prayed by them. Ex. A7 is very clear and supporting to the case of the complainants. The deceased Devireddy Pedda Gopal Reddy is the owner of the vehicle bearing No. AP 04 Y : 7951 and trailer No. AP 04 Y : 7952 which is duly insured with the respondent. Ex. A8 proves the same that the Devireddy Pedda Gopal Reddy is the owner of the vehicle. In these circumstances there is deficiency of service on the part of the respondent.
12. Point No. 3. In the result, the complaint is allowed directing the respondent to pay the claim amount of the complainants i.e. ₹ 2,00,000/- (Rupees two lakhs only) with 9% interest p.a. from the date of accident i.e. 18-3-2014 till realization, pay ₹ 5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) towards cost of the complaint (in total ₹ 2,05,000/- (Rupees Two lakhs Five Thousand only) within 45 days of date of receipt of orders.
Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by him, corrected and pronounced by us in the open Forum, this the 22nd December 2015.
MEMBER PRESIDENT
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
Witnesses examined.
For Complainant : NIL For Respondents : NIL
Exhibits marked for Complainant: -
Ex. A1 Attested Copy of the F.I.R. in crime No.26/14 of Vontimitta P.S.
Dt.19-3-14.
Ex. A2 Attested copy of the inquest report, dt 19-3-2014.
Ex. A3 Attested copy of the post mortem, dt 19-3-2014.
Ex. A4 Attested copy of the charge-sheet, dt 28-6-2014.
Ex. A5 Attested Copy of the Death Certificate, Dt.18-8-15.
Ex. A6 Photo copy of the Family Member Certificate, dt 15-4-2014.
Ex. A7 Photo copy of the Insurance policy of the Tractor and Trailor
from 29-6-2013 to Dt. 28-6-2014.
Ex. A8 Photo copy of the R.C. Dated, dt 12-7-2011.
Ex. A9 Office copy of the legal notice and ack. card dt 17-5-15.
Exhibits marked on behalf of the Respondent
Ex. B1 P/c of policy copy of terms and conditions.
Ex. B2 P/c of personal accident claim form.
Ex. B3 P/c of R.C. of tractor and trailer.
Ex. B4 P/c of driving license of D. Pedda Gopal Reddy.
MEMBER PRESIDENT
Copy to :-
- Sri S. Nagi Reddy, Advocate for complainant.
- Sri D. Rajasekhar Reddy, Advocate for Respondent
B.V.P. - - -
