Consumer complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act 2019 for repudiation of vehicle theft insurance claim
Cites the IPC, CrPC or Evidence Act. For matters from 1 July 2024, use the BNS, BNSS or BSA.
0 of 61 blanks filled
BEFORE THE HON'BLE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, DISTRICT EAST, SAINI ENCLAVE, DELHI
CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO. Consumer complaint number OF 2024
IN THE MATTER OF:
Complainant's name: COMPLAINANT
VERSUS
Opposite parties' names
Opposite parties' addresses: OPPOSITE PARTIES
INDEX
| S.NO. | PARTICULARS | PAGE(S) |
|---|---|---|
| 1. | LIST OF DATES AND EVENTS |
| 2. | MEMO OF PARTIES |
| 3. | CONSUMER COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 35 OF THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 2019, ALONG WITH AFFIDAVIT |
| 4. | ANNEXURE-A — Copy of tax invoice dated Date of vehicle tax invoice for the purchase of the vehicle, issued by Opposite Party No. 2 |
| 5. | ANNEXURE-B — Copy of letter dated Date of vehicle registration letter regarding registration of vehicle bearing No. Vehicle registration number purchased by the Complainant |
| 6. | ANNEXURE-C (colly.) — Copy of Insurance Policy No. Insurance policy number dated Date of insurance policy issued by Opposite Party No. 1, along with the complete terms and conditions of the policy |
| 7. | ANNEXURE-D — Copy of FIR No. FIR number registered with E-Police Station E-police station name Marg, District Crime Branch, Delhi, on the complaint of the Complainant |
| 8. | ANNEXURE-E — Copy of the claim intimation receipt dated Date of claim intimation receipt issued by Opposite Party No. 1 Insurance Company |
| 9. | ANNEXURE-F — Copy of the final untraced report dated Date of untraced final report submitted by the police officials before the Ld. ACMM, North District, Rohini Courts, Delhi |
| 10. | ANNEXURE-G — Copy of the repudiation letter dated Date of repudiation letter issued by Opposite Party No. 1 Insurance Company |
| 11. | VAKALATNAMA |
DELHICOMPLAINANT
THROUGH
Name of complainant's counsel
Advocate designation of complainant's counsel (ADVOCATE)
DATED: Date of drafting/signing of complaint
Mobile number of complainant's counsel (Mobile No.)
Email of complainant's counsel (Email)
BEFORE THE HON'BLE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, DISTRICT EAST, SAINI ENCLAVE, DELHI
CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO. Consumer complaint number OF 2024
IN THE MATTER OF:
Complainant's name: COMPLAINANT
VERSUS
Opposite parties' names
Opposite parties' addresses: OPPOSITE PARTIES
MEMO OF PARTIES
**Sh. Complainant's name: COMPLAINANT**
VERSUS
1. Opposite parties' names: OPPOSITE PARTIES
DELHICOMPLAINANT
THROUGH
Name of complainant's counsel
Advocate designation of complainant's counsel (ADVOCATE)
DATED: Date of drafting/signing of complaint
Mobile number of complainant's counsel (Mobile No.)
Email of complainant's counsel (Email)
BEFORE THE HON'BLE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, DISTRICT EAST, SAINI ENCLAVE, DELHI
CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO. Consumer complaint number OF 2024
IN THE MATTER OF:
Complainant's name: COMPLAINANT
VERSUS
Opposite parties' names: OPPOSITE PARTIES
CONSUMER COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 35 OF THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 2019
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:-
1.That the present consumer complaint is being preferred by the Complainant against the Opposite Parties (hereinafter also referred to as "the OPs/Respondents") under the provisions of Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. The Complainant places on record before this Hon'ble Commission the unfair and unlawful trade practices resorted to by the Respondents, and the deficiency in service and wrongful denial of the insurance claim, against which the Complainant seeks appropriate relief.
2.That the Complainant is a law-abiding citizen of India and has been constrained to approach this Hon'ble Commission against the unlawful and illegal acts of the Respondents. Opposite Party No. 1 is an insurance company registered under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as "the Insurance Company/Respondent No. 1"). Opposite Party No. 2 is a private limited company and an authorised dealer of Vehicle make/brand (dealership's brand), registered under the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as "the Dealership/Respondent No. 2").
3.That the Complainant purchased/booked the vehicle, namely Vehicle make, model and colour, on Date of vehicle booking/purchase from the showroom of Respondent No. 2 against Tax Invoice No. Tax invoice number, and paid the invoice amount of the said vehicle, being ₹Vehicle invoice amount (₹)/-. At the time of handing over the said vehicle, Respondent No. 2 also issued a letter dated Date of vehicle registration letter, providing details of the temporary registration of the subject vehicle, i.e. Temporary registration number of vehicle, granted under the provisions of Section 43 of the Motor Vehicles Act, which was valid from Start date of temporary registration to End date of temporary registration. The said vehicle also stood under Hire-Purchase/Lease Agreement/Hypothecation in favour of Hypothecation/financing bank name (hereinafter referred to as the "subject vehicle").
4.That the subject vehicle was insured with Respondent No. 1, Opposite party no. 1 (insurance company) name, through Respondent No. 2, which issued the policy bearing No. Insurance policy number, valid from Insurance policy start date to Insurance policy end date, and the Complainant paid the total premium of ₹Insurance premium amount (₹)/- (hereinafter referred to as the "said policy").
5.That, unfortunately, during the subsistence of the said policy, on Date of vehicle theft, the subject vehicle of the Complainant was stolen from Location of theft, Location of theft (hotel name/address), Area/district where vehicle was stolen. The incident was immediately reported to the police by the Complainant, and an e-FIR bearing No. E-FIR number was lodged on Date of e-FIR registration at the E-Police Station E-police station name (partial), District Crime Branch, Delhi, under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). Subsequently, the Complainant informed Respondent No. 1 and lodged his claim under the said policy. Respondent No. 1 acknowledged the claim and issued a claim intimation receipt on Date of claim intimation receipt, indicating that a surveyor would be appointed in this regard.
6.That on Date of untraced final report, the police submitted an "Untraced" final report before the Ld. Court of Name of the Ld. ACMM before whom the untraced report was filed, Ld. ACMM, North District, Rohini Courts, Delhi, indicating that the subject vehicle could not be traced.
7.That on Date of repudiation letter, the Complainant received a letter from Respondent No. 1, the insurance company, whereby the claim of the Complainant was repudiated on the following grounds:
"On a careful perusal of the claim documents, it was observed that the vehicle was not registered with the RTA at the material time of theft, which amounts to a fundamental breach of the policy and also an offence under Section 39 read with Section 192 of the M.V. Act, 1988.
We therefore express our inability to consider your claim.
The Company reserves the right to repudiate the claim on any other grounds that may come to light at any time in future."
8.It is submitted that, on a reading of the reason for repudiation, it appears that the claim was rejected solely on the ground that the subject vehicle was not registered with the RTA at the material time of the theft. However, Respondent No. 1 failed to take note of the fact that the temporary registration number Temporary registration number of vehicle, issued under Section 43 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, was valid from Start date of temporary registration to End date of temporary registration. This provision permits the temporary registration of a vehicle, which is legally valid for the specific period as prescribed by the State Government, and the subject vehicle was stolen within this period. The temporary registration was lawfully granted and was active at the time of the theft. It is pertinent to note the judgment in National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Param Pal Singh (2007), wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India held that temporary registration is valid and effective under the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The rejection of the claim on the ground that the vehicle did not bear permanent registration is arbitrary and contrary to the principles of justice and fairness.
9.That the insurance Policy No. Insurance policy number was valid from Insurance policy start date to Insurance policy end date, and the premium thereunder was duly paid by the Complainant. The doctrine of uberrimae fidei (utmost good faith) mandates that both parties to a contract of insurance must act in good faith towards each other. In United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Harchand Rai Chandan Lal, (2004) 8 SCC 644, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that an insurer cannot avoid its liability unless the insured has been guilty of wilful misrepresentation or suppression of material facts. In the present case, there was no such misrepresentation, and the vehicle was insured with full disclosure. The rejection of the claim is therefore illegal, unfair and constitutes an unfair trade practice.
10.That in the present case, OP No. 2, the dealership from which the Complainant purchased the subject vehicle, was under an obligation to complete the process of permanent registration of the vehicle. Its failure to do so ought not to prejudice the insurance claim of the Complainant. In ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Kiran Malhotra (2018), the Hon'ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) held that an insurer cannot deny a claim solely on the ground of delay in permanent registration if the vehicle was covered by a temporary registration and a valid insurance policy at the time of the incident. Further, the failure of OP No. 2 to fulfil this obligation ought not to prejudice the insured, i.e., the Complainant. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Swaran Singh & Ors., (2004) 3 SCC 297, held that an insurer cannot repudiate a claim on technical grounds if the insured has taken all reasonable steps to comply with the terms of the policy.
11.That the rejection of the Complainant's claim on such an irrelevant basis demonstrates a lack of due diligence and adherence to fair claims processing practices by OP No. 1. By repudiating the Complainant's claim on an unjustifiable ground, OP No. 1 has effectively deprived the Complainant of the benefits and coverage for which he diligently paid the premiums. The actions of OP No. 1 in this matter are not only in violation of the terms of the policy but also raise serious questions concerning ethical business practices and consumer rights.
12.That the serious question which arises for consideration is the repudiation of the claim by the officials of OP No. 1 Insurance Company without considering the request and the documents submitted by the insured. The Complainant, through the present complaint, requests this Hon'ble Commission to kindly award compensation against the Opposite Parties / Respondents for not applying their mind and for not assigning any reasons, except reproducing the grounds for rejecting the claim.
13.That the aforesaid conduct of the Opposite Parties is illegal and unlawful, and the Opposite Parties have further committed unfair trade practices and provided deficient services to their customers, including the Complainant.
14.That the axiomatic facts emerging from the foregoing paragraphs clearly show that Opposite Party No. 1 has repudiated the claim of the Complainant with dishonest and mala fide intentions. The Opposite Parties have been grossly deficient in their services and have duped the Complainant through their unfair trade practices and policies. The Opposite Parties have thereby caused wrongful loss to the Complainant and wrongful gain to themselves at the expense of the Complainant.
15.That the present complaint is being filed by the Complainant owing to the illegal and unlawful conduct of the Opposite Parties, and owing to the fact that the Opposite Parties are committing unfair trade practices and providing deficient services to their consumers.
16.That on account of the deficiency in service and the unfair trade practices adopted by the Opposite Parties, the Complainant has been subjected to tremendous mental agony and anguish, along with immense financial loss.
17.That the cause of action for filing the present Complaint arose on Date of insurance policy issuance, when the insurance policy in respect of the subject vehicle was issued by OP No. 1. It further arose on Date of hypothecation and registration of vehicle, when the hypothecation and registration of the subject vehicle were effected by OP No. 2. It further arose on Date of vehicle theft, when the subject vehicle of the Complainant was stolen and the Complainant immediately lodged FIR No. FIR number. It further arose on Date of insurance claim lodgement, when the Complainant lodged a claim with OP No. 1 in respect of the subject vehicle. The cause of action further arose on Date of untraced final report, when the police officials submitted the "Untraced" final report before the Ld. Trial court where the untraced final report was filed. The cause of action further arose on Date of repudiation letter, when OP No. 1 repudiated the claim of the Complainant on the ground that the vehicle was not registered with the RTA at the material time of the theft, which is an unjust and unfair practice on the part of OP No. 1. The cause of action is still continuing in favour of the Complainant and against the Opposite Parties. Hence, the present complaint is within limitation.
18.That the cause of action arose in favour of the Complainant and against the Opposite Parties, and subsists till date. The same is within the territorial jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Commission, as the Complainant resides, works and earns at Complainant's address, which is within the jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Commission. Hence, this Hon'ble Commission has the jurisdiction to entertain the present complaint.
19.That the prescribed and applicable court fee has been paid along with the instant Complaint.
PRAYER
In light of the aforementioned facts and circumstances, it is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Commission may kindly allow the present complaint and direct the Opposite Parties as follows: -
a)Direct OP No. 1 / Respondent No. 1 to pay the total insured value of the subject vehicle, i.e., Rs. Insured declared value of vehicle (₹)/-, along with interest @ 18% p.a., on account of the rejection of the claim by OP No. 1 (interest to be calculated from the date of rejection of the Complainant's claim till the date of complete refund of the claim amount); and
b)Hold OP No. 2 / Respondent No. 2 accountable for its failure to ensure the completion of the permanent registration process in a timely manner.
c)Award an amount of Rs. Compensation amount for mental agony (₹)/- against the Opposite Parties / Respondents on account of the mental agony, damages, harassment and financial loss suffered by the Complainant due to the wrongful rejection of his legitimate claim;
d)Pay an amount of Rs. Litigation cost amount (₹)/- as litigation costs to the Complainant; and
e)Issue directions to the concerned authorities to prevent such arbitrary and illegal actions by insurers and dealerships in the future.
f)Grant any such other relief as this Hon'ble Commission may deem just and proper in favour of the Complainant.
Place where the complaint is filed and verifiedCOMPLAINANT
THROUGH
DATED
ADVOCATE
Mob. No. ------------------
Email:
VERIFICATION
The above-named Complainant does hereby solemnly affirm and declare that the particulars stated above are true to the best of my knowledge and belief, and that nothing material has been concealed therefrom. I further certify that Annexures A to G annexed to the complaint are true copies of the original documents.
Verified at Place where the complaint is filed and verified on this Date of verification of complaint day of Month and year of verification.
COMPLAINANT
BEFORE THE HON'BLE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, District of the Consumer Commission;
Address of the Consumer Commission.
CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO. Consumer complaint number OF Year of the consumer complaint.
IN THE MATTER OF: -
Complainant's name: COMPLAINANT
VERSUS
Opposite parties' names
Opposite parties' addresses: OPPOSITE PARTIES
AFFIDAVIT
I, Complainant's name, aged about Complainant's age years, S/o Sh. Complainant's father's name, R/o Complainant's residential address, do hereby solemnly affirm and state as under: -
AFFIDAVIT
1.That I am the Complainant in the present case and am fully conversant with the facts and circumstances thereof, and am therefore competent to swear this Affidavit.
2.That the contents of the accompanying Consumer Complaint filed under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 have been drafted under my instructions and, save the legal averments contained therein, the same are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. The legal averments contained therein are true and correct on the basis of legal advice received by me, which I believe to be true and correct. The contents of the accompanying Complaint are not repeated herein for the sake of brevity and to avoid prolixity.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION:
Verified at Place of verification on this Date of verification of affidavit day of Month of verification, Year of verification, that the contents of this Affidavit are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and information, that no part of it is false, and that no material fact has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT