CONSUMER FORUM,GANJAM,ORISSA.
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, GANAJAM, BERHMPUR,ORISSA.
consumer case(CC) No. CC/06/36
Sri B.Narayan Rao, aged about 40 years Son of B.Krishna Murty,Occupation: Business.Resident of Podamari,Ps: Patapur, Dist: Ganjam.
………..Appellant(s)
Vs.
The Divisional Manager, The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Divisional Office, Giri Road, Berhampur, Dist: Ganjam.
………..Respondent(s)
BEFORE:
1. Mr.Harish Chandra Nayak
2. Smt. Shanti Panigrahi
3. Mr. N Tuna Sahu
Sri Hasris Chandra Nayak, President: Deficiency in insurance service against the O.P. is the grievance of the complainant. 2. Briefly stated, the case of the complainant is that the complainant is the sole registered owner of the vehicle (Truck) bearing Registration No.OR-07B-7419 which was insured with the O.P. vide policy No.345400/2004/5249 dt.22.10.2003 valid for the period from 22.10.2003 to 21.10.2004. The complainant paid premium of Rs.14,241/- to the O.P. for the assured sum of Rs.400000/-. On 5th April 2004 at about 2 A.M. near Satya Dhaba Hotel on state Highway at M.Nagulapalli in the state of Andhrapradesh the vehicle met an accident causing miserable damage to the vehicle owing to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the vehicle bearing Registration No.AP-16X-4556. Soon after the accident the driver of the vehicle Sri Prasanna Kumar Pradhan reported the matter before the Inspector of Police, Bimadole Circle, Bhimadole, A.P. and the complainant intimated the O.P. about the accident to do the needful. The O.P. deputed his surveyor in order to assess the loss on account of the damage caused to the vehicle due to the accident and the surveyors who conducted the survey must have submitted their reports to the O.P. After 8 months in his letter No.2402 of 2005 dated 6.12.2004 the O.P. intimated the complainant that his claim has been repudiated on the ground that the original driving license No.27221/86 the driver of the vehicle which was issued by the D.T.O.Itanagar in favour of Sri Prasanna Kumar Pradhan was found fake according to the report of their investigator Sri Kadam Kiri, Itanagar. It is needless to say that the license of the Driver Sri Prasanna Klumar Pradhan has been renewed by the Licensing Authority, Ganjam, Chhatrapur from time to time and it has been renewed up to 6.7.2005 till which date the same is valid and its validity at the relevant time can not be questioned in any manner and the question remains about the original license issued by the licensing Authority at Itanagar. Thus the complainant has no scope whatsoever to know about the fake license of the driver. The policy issued in favour of the complainant being for Rs.4,00,000/- but the claim amount of Rs.1,00,000/-.The actual amount spent to get the vehicle repaired to make it road worthy. Due to non payment of the claim amount the complainant has incurred irreparable loss, which he would not have sustained, had the claim amount been paid by the O.P. immediately at the relevant time. Alleging deficiency in service on the part of the O.P. the complainant prayed to direct the O.P. to pay the claim amount of Rs.1,00,000/- with interest from the material date i.e. from 5.4.2004 till actual payment is made and to pay compensation towards the inconvenience caused and the harassment causing mental agony in the best interest of justice. 3. On receipt of notice issued by this Forum, the O.P. filed version through his Advocate. It is stated that while the complainant truck No.OR-07B-7419 was plying from Bhallagada to Gunture (AP) it met with an accident on the state high way nears M.Naglapalli on 4/5-4-04 at about 2 A.M. (night). Due to the alleged accident the aforesaid vehicle sustained damages. Thereafter the complainant lodged the claim before the O.P. as the said vehicle was comprehensively insured. While the claim was processed, the complainant has submitted an affidavit before the O.P. in which the complainant submitted that one prasant Kumar Pradhan having D.L. bearings No.27211/86 issued by Itanagasr and subsequently it has been renewed by L.A. Ganjam vide D.L.No.3508/90 was driving the aforesaid vehicle. As the complainant allowed an unauthorized person who had fake driving license to drive the insured vehicle by violating policy condition, so the O.P. has rightly repudiated the claim. The O.P.deputed a surveyor to survey the vehicle for making assessment of loss caused to it. The surveyor after due survey of the damaged vehicle has assessed the loss for an amount of Rs.39,500/- and submitted his report to the O.P Since the O.P. is the custodian of public money, it is their duties to see that the public money should not be diverted in any immoral way. Hence prayed to dismiss the case. 4. On the date of hearing we heard arguments from both sides at length, gone through the complaint petition, version as well as documents filed by both sides. This Forum by relying upon a citation passed by National Commission, New Delhi in United India Insurance Co. ltd. Versus Deen Dayal 2009(1) CPR 284 such as:” The report of the surveyor is an important document and it can not be brushed aside lightly without any material to the contrary on record.” We feel the surveyor had assessed the loss for Rs.39,500/- which appears reasonable. In the result we direct the Opposite party to pay an amount of Rs.39,500/- with interest @9% per annum from the date of filing of complaint i.e. 2.3.2006 together with cost of Rs.1000/- to the complainant within one month of receipt of this order failing which the same amount will carry 12% penal interest in the best interest of consumer justice. The order is pronounced in the open Forum on this day of 17th December 2009. Typed to my dictation and corrected by me.
Sri Hasris Chandra Nayak, President: Deficiency in insurance service against the O.P. is the grievance of the complainant. 2. Briefly stated, the case of the complainant is that the complainant is the sole registered owner of the vehicle (Truck) bearing Registration No.OR-07B-7419 which was insured with the O.P. vide policy No.345400/2004/5249 dt.22.10.2003 valid for the period from 22.10.2003 to 21.10.2004. The complainant paid premium of Rs.14,241/- to the O.P. for the assured sum of Rs.400000/-. On 5th April 2004 at about 2 A.M. near Satya Dhaba Hotel on state Highway at M.Nagulapalli in the state of Andhrapradesh the vehicle met an accident causing miserable damage to the vehicle owing to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the vehicle bearing Registration No.AP-16X-4556. Soon after the accident the driver of the vehicle Sri Prasanna Kumar Pradhan reported the matter before the Inspector of Police, Bimadole Circle, Bhimadole, A.P. and the complainant intimated the O.P. about the accident to do the needful. The O.P. deputed his surveyor in order to assess the loss on account of the damage caused to the vehicle due to the accident and the surveyors who conducted the survey must have submitted their reports to the O.P. After 8 months in his letter No.2402 of 2005 dated 6.12.2004 the O.P. intimated the complainant that his claim has been repudiated on the ground that the original driving license No.27221/86 the driver of the vehicle which was issued by the D.T.O.Itanagar in favour of Sri Prasanna Kumar Pradhan was found fake according to the report of their investigator Sri Kadam Kiri, Itanagar. It is needless to say that the license of the Driver Sri Prasanna Klumar Pradhan has been renewed by the Licensing Authority, Ganjam, Chhatrapur from time to time and it has been renewed up to 6.7.2005 till which date the same is valid and its validity at the relevant time can not be questioned in any manner and the question remains about the original license issued by the licensing Authority at Itanagar. Thus the complainant has no scope whatsoever to know about the fake license of the driver. The policy issued in favour of the complainant being for Rs.4,00,000/- but the claim amount of Rs.1,00,000/-.The actual amount spent to get the vehicle repaired to make it road worthy. Due to non payment of the claim amount the complainant has incurred irreparable loss, which he would not have sustained, had the claim amount been paid by the O.P. immediately at the relevant time. Alleging deficiency in service on the part of the O.P. the complainant prayed to direct the O.P. to pay the claim amount of Rs.1,00,000/- with interest from the material date i.e. from 5.4.2004 till actual payment is made and to pay compensation towards the inconvenience caused and the harassment causing mental agony in the best interest of justice. 3. On receipt of notice issued by this Forum, the O.P. filed version through his Advocate. It is stated that while the complainant truck No.OR-07B-7419 was plying from Bhallagada to Gunture (AP) it met with an accident on the state high way nears M.Naglapalli on 4/5-4-04 at about 2 A.M. (night). Due to the alleged accident the aforesaid vehicle sustained damages. Thereafter the complainant lodged the claim before the O.P. as the said vehicle was comprehensively insured. While the claim was processed, the complainant has submitted an affidavit before the O.P. in which the complainant submitted that one prasant Kumar Pradhan having D.L. bearings No.27211/86 issued by Itanagasr and subsequently it has been renewed by L.A. Ganjam vide D.L.No.3508/90 was driving the aforesaid vehicle. As the complainant allowed an unauthorized person who had fake driving license to drive the insured vehicle by violating policy condition, so the O.P. has rightly repudiated the claim. The O.P.deputed a surveyor to survey the vehicle for making assessment of loss caused to it. The surveyor after due survey of the damaged vehicle has assessed the loss for an amount of Rs.39,500/- and submitted his report to the O.P Since the O.P. is the custodian of public money, it is their duties to see that the public money should not be diverted in any immoral way. Hence prayed to dismiss the case. 4. On the date of hearing we heard arguments from both sides at length, gone through the complaint petition, version as well as documents filed by both sides. This Forum by relying upon a citation passed by National Commission, New Delhi in United India Insurance Co. ltd. Versus Deen Dayal 2009(1) CPR 284 such as:” The report of the surveyor is an important document and it can not be brushed aside lightly without any material to the contrary on record.” We feel the surveyor had assessed the loss for Rs.39,500/- which appears reasonable. In the result we direct the Opposite party to pay an amount of Rs.39,500/- with interest @9% per annum from the date of filing of complaint i.e. 2.3.2006 together with cost of Rs.1000/- to the complainant within one month of receipt of this order failing which the same amount will carry 12% penal interest in the best interest of consumer justice. The order is pronounced in the open Forum on this day of 17th December 2009. Typed to my dictation and corrected by me.
………………….
Mr.Harish Chandra Nayak
…………………
Smt. Shanti Panigrahi
………………….
Mr. N Tuna Sahu
Tags: Oriental Insurance