BEFORE THE HON’BLE DISTRICT CONSUMER
DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION; DISTRICT EAST;
SAINI ENCLAVE, DELHI.
CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO. ____ OF 2024.
IN THE MATTER OF:-
____________________ :
COMPLAINANT
VERSUS
____________________
____________________ :
OPPOSITE PARTIES
INDEX
|
S.NO. |
PARTICULARS |
PAGE(S) |
|
1. |
LIST OF DATES
& 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 INVOICE / BILL DATED 27.02.2023 OF PURCHASED OF VEHICLE ISSUED BY THE OP
NO.2. |
|
|
5. |
ANNEXURE-B COPY
OF LETTER DATED ______________OF REGISTRATION NO. ______________ OF PURCHASED
VEHICLE. |
|
|
6. |
ANNEXURE-C (colly) COPY
OF INSURANCE POLICY NO. ______________DATED _____ ISSUED BY THE OP NO.1. ALONG
WITH COMPLETE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE POLICY. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
7. |
ANNEXURE-D COPY
OF FIR NO.______ REGISTERED WITH E-POLICE STATION ________ MARG, DISTRICT
CRIME BRANCH, DELHI BY THE COMPLAINANT. |
|
|
8. |
ANNEXURE-E COPY
OF CLAIM INTIMATION RECEIPT ON ________ ISSUED BY THE OP NO.1 INSURANCE
COMPANY. |
|
|
9. |
ANNEXURE-F COPY
OF FINAL UNTRACED REPORT DATED __________ SUBMITTED BY THE POLICE OFFICIALS
BEFORE THE LD. ACMM, NORTH DISTRICT, ROHINI COURTS, DELHI. |
|
|
10. |
ANNEXURE-G COPY
OF REPUDIATION LETTER DATED _______ ISSUED BY THE OP NO.1 INSURANCE COMPANY. |
|
|
11. |
VAKALATNAMA. |
|
DELHI COMPLAINANT
THROUGH
DATED
_------------------------
ADVOCATE
-------------------------
Mob.No.-----------------------
Email: --------------------------
BEFORE THE HON’BLE DISTRICT CONSUMER
DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION; DISTRICT EAST;
SAINI ENCLAVE, DELHI.
CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO. ____ OF 2024.
IN THE MATTER OF:-
____________________ :
COMPLAINANT
VERSUS
____________________
____________________ : OPPOSITE PARTIES
MEMO OF PARTIES
SH. ____________________
: COMPLAINANT
VERSUS
1. _____________________ : OPPOSITE PARTIES
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DELHI COMPLAINANT
THROUGH
DATED
---------------------------------
ADVOCATE
------------------------------------
Mob.No.----------------------------
Email: ---------------------------------
BEFORE THE HON’BLE DISTRICT CONSUMER
DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION; DISTRICT EAST;
SAINI ENCLAVE, DELHI.
CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO. ____ OF 2024.
IN THE MATTER OF:-
_________________. : COMPLAINANT
VERSUS
__________________________ : 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
would like to bring to the attention of this Hon’ble Commission the unfair and
unlawful trade practices being carried out by the Respondents and the
deficiency in service as well as denial of the claim against which the
Complainant seeks relief.
2.
That the Complainant is a
law abiding citizen of India and constrained to approach this Hon’ble
Commission against the unlawful and illegal acts of the Respondents. The Opposite
Party no.1 is an Insurance Company and registered under the provisions of the
Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as "the Insurance Company/ Respondent no.1"). The Opposite Party No.2 is Private Limited Company / Authorized
Dealer of Toyota, registered under the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as "the
Dealership/Respondent no.2").
3.
That the Complainant was purchased / booked the
vehicle Toyota Fortuner, Super White Color on _________ from the Respondent
no.2 Showroom against the Tax Invoice bearing No.A____________- and paid the
invoice amount of said vehicle for a sum of Rs._________/- and while handing
over the said vehicle, the Respondent no.2 also given the letter dated ______________in
which providing the details of registration of temporary number of the subject vehicle
i.e. ______________ under the provisions of Section 43 of M.V. Act which valid
from ______________to __________ and Hire-Purchase/Lease Agreement / Hypothecation
of vehicle in favour of HDFC Bank (hereinafter called as “subject vehicle”).
4.
That the insurance of the subject vehicle was also done by the
Respondent no.1 Cholamandlam MS General Insurance through Respondent no.2 and
issued the policy bearing No. ______________which valid from ______ to __________
and the Complainant paid the total premium of Rs._____________/- (hereinafter
called as “said policy”).
5.
During this period, unfortunately on ________, the subject vehicle
of the Complainant was stolen from Hotel AP Holidays, ______, Rohini, Delhi.
The incident was immediately reported to the police by the Complainant and an e-FIR
bearing No. ________on ______ was lodged at the e-Police Station K_______-,
District Crime Branch, Delhi, under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
Subsequently, the Complainant informed the Respondent no.1 and lodged his claim
in the said policy. The Respondent no.1 insurance company acknowledged the
claim and issued a claim intimation receipt on _______, indicating that a
surveyor would be appointed in this respect.
6.
That on __________, the police submitted an
"Untraced" final report before the Ld. Court of Ms. Niharika Kumar
Sharma, Ld.ACMM-01, North District, Rohini Courts, Delhi, indicating that the subject
vehicle could not be traced.
7.
That on May 4, 2024, the Complainant received a letter from
the Respondent no.1 insurance company repudiated the claim of the Complainant
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 fundamental breach of the policy and also an offense 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
to repudiate the claim on any other grounds that may come to light at any time
in future”.
8.
It is submitted that it appears
from the reason of the repudiation that the claim was rejected only on account of
subject vehicle was not
registered with the RTA at the material time of theft. However, the Respondent no.1 failed to take note of the
fact that the temporary registration number ______________, issued under
Section 43 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, was valid from ________-, to __________.
This
provision allows for the temporary registration of a vehicle, which is legally
valid for a specific period as prescribed by the State Government under this
period the subject vehicle was stolen. The
temporary registration was lawfully granted and was active at the time of the
theft. It is pertinent to mention the
judgment in National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Param Pal Singh (2007),
where 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 grounds of the vehicle not
having a permanent registration is arbitrary and contrary to the principles of
justice and fairness.
9.
That the insurance Policy
No. ______________was valid from _______, to _______, and the premium was fully
paid by the Complainant. The doctrine of uberrimae fidei (utmost good faith)
mandates that both parties in an insurance contract must act in good faith. In United
India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Harchand Rai Chandan Lal, (2004) 8 SCC 644, the
Supreme Court emphasized that the insurer cannot avoid liability unless the insured
party has been guilty of willful misrepresentation or suppression of material
facts. In my case, there was no such misrepresentation, and the vehicle was
insured with full disclosure, so rejection of
claim is illegal, unfair and unlawful trade practices
10.
In the present case, the
Respondent no.2 dealership from which the subject vehicle was purchased by the
Complainant, had an obligation to complete the process of permanent
registration. Their failure to do so should not prejudice insurance claim of
the Complainant. In ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Kiran
Malhotra (2018), the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
(NCDRC) held that the insurer could not 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 Respondent no.2 to
fulfill this obligation should not prejudice the insured party, i.e., Complainant.
The 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
based on technical grounds if the insured has taken all reasonable steps to
comply with the policy terms.
11.
The rejection of claim of
the Complainant on such an irrelevant basis demonstrates a lack of due
diligence and adherence to fair claims processing practices by OP1. By
repudiating claim of the complainant based on an unjustifiable reason, the OP1 is
effectively depriving the complainant of the benefits and coverage he diligently
paid premiums. That the actions of the OP1 in this matter are not only in violation
of the policy terms but also raise questions about ethical business practices
and consumer rights.
12.
The serious question which arises for
consideration is passing the repudiation of the claim by the officials of OP1 Insurance
Company without considering the request and documents submitted by the insured.
The complainant through the present complaint request this Hon’ble Commission to
kindly pass compensation against the Opposite parties / Respondents on account
of not applying or giving any reasons except reproducing the grounds of not
allowing the claim.
13.
That such being illegal and unlawful
conducts of the Opposite Parties, and further, the Opposite Parties are committing
unfair trade practice and providing deficient services to their customers including the Complainant.
14.
That the axiomatic facts that emerged from
the above clearly show that the 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 has duped the complainant in lure
of their services, unfair trade practice and policies. The opposite Parties have
caused wrongful loss to the complainant and wrongful gains 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 the fact that the Opposite Parties are committing unfair trade practices
and providing deficient services to their consumers.
16.
That
on account of deficiency in service and unfair trade practices adopted on
behalf of the Opposite Parties, the Complainant herein was subject to tremendous
mental agony and anguish along with immense financial loss.
17.
That
the Cause of Action for filing the present Complaint arose on ______ when the insurance
policy issued by the OP1 of the subject vehicle. It is further arose on ______________when
the hypothecation and registration of the subject vehicle was done by the OP2.
It is further arose on ____ when the subject vehicle of the complainant was stolen
and the complainant immediately lodged an FIR No.______ and further arose on _______
when the complainant lodged an claim with the OP1 for the subject vehicle. The
cause of action further arose on ______ police officials
submitted the “Untraced” final report before the Ld. ACMM, North District,
Rohini Courts, Delhi. The cause of action further arose on ________ when the
OP1 repudiated the claim of the complainant on the ground that the vehicle was
not registered with RTA at the material time of theft which is unjust and
unfair practice of the OP1. 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, and same is within the territorial jurisdiction of this
Hon'ble Commission as the Complainant reside, work and gain at Vivek Vihar
Phase-I, East Delhi 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 applicable court fees have been filed along with the instant
Complaint.
PRAYER :-
In
light of the aforementioned facts and circumstances, it is therefore, respectfully prayed that the complaint be kindly
allowed, the Opposite Parties be kindly directed to: -
a)
The OP1 / Respondent no.1
pay the total insured value of the subject vehicle i.e. Rs._______/- along with
interest @18% p.a. on account of rejection of claim by OP1 (interest to be calculated starting from rejection
of claim of the complainant, till the date of complete refund of the claim
amount); and
b)
Hold the OP2/ Respondent no.2 accountable for their
failure to ensure the completion of the permanent registration process in
timely manner.
c)
Award an amount of Rs. __________/- against
the OPs / Respondents on account of mental agony,
damages, harassment and financial loss suffered by the
complainant due to the wrongful rejection of the legitimate claim;
d)
Pay an amount of Rs.__________/-
as the litigation cost 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)
Pay any such other amount
as this commission is pleased to find just and proper to the complainant.
DELHI COMPLAINANT
THROUGH
DATED
----------------
ADVOCATE
---------------------------
Mob.No------------------
Email: _______________
VERIFICATION
:-
The above named complainants do hereby
solemnly affirm and declare that the particulars stated above are true to the
best of my knowledge and belief and that nothing has been concealed therein. I
further certify that Annexures A to G affixed to the complaint are true copies
of the original documents.
Verified at
Delhi on this ___ day of July, 2024.
COMPLAINANT
BEFORE THE HON’BLE DISTRICT CONSUMER
DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION; DISTRICT EAST;
SAINI ENCLAVE, DELHI.
CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO. ____ OF 2024.
IN THE MATTER OF:-
____________________ :
COMPLAINANT
VERSUS
____________________
____________________ : OPPOSITE PARTIES
AFFIDAVIT
I, ____________________, aged about ___
years, S/o Sh. __________, R/o _________, Delhi-110095, do hereby solemnly
affirm and state as under:-
1. That I am the Complainant in this case
and am well conversant with the facts and circumstances of the present case and
hence am competent to swear this Affidavit.
2. That the contents of the accompanying Consumer Complaint under Section 35 of
the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, have been drafted under my instructions and
the contents thereof, except the legal averments contained therein, are true
and correct to the best of my knowledge. The legal averments contained therein
are true and correct on the basis of the legal advice received by me and
believed by me to be true and correct. The contents of the accompanying
Complaint are not being repeated over here for the sake of brevity and to avoid
prolixity.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION:
Verified
at Delhi on this the ___ day of July, 2024, that the contents of this Affidavit
are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and information and that no
part of this Affidavit is false and no material facts have been concealed
therefrom.
DEPONENT