JASWINDER SINGH Vs. NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this revision petition, there is challenge to order dated 17.1.2013 passed by Punjab State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chandigarh (for short , 'State Commission') in First Appeal No.1164/2011, vide which appeal filed by Respondents /Opposite Parties was allowed. Consequently, complaint filed by Petitioner/Complainant was dismissed.

(2.) Brief facts are, that petitioner purchased a Tata Indica Car from one Joginder Singh who got the said car fully insured from the respondents for the period from 14.09.2009 to 13.09.2010. After purchasing the said car from Joginder Singh, petitioner applied for change of Ownership/Registration of the car. It is also stated, that after purchase of car, petitioner stepped into the shoes of previous owner. Intimation regarding purchase of car was given by the petitioner to the respondents and requested them for transfer of insurance cover/policy in his name. On 25.03.2010, registration of car was transferred in his name by D.T.O. Sangrur. However, on the same day at about 10.00 p.m., when petitioner was coming from village Cheemato Sunam, suddenly a stray cow came in front of the car. In order to save the cow, petitioner turned the car side way but lost his control over the car and car turned out in the adjoining fields. Petitioner also suffered some injuries in the accident but the car was completely damaged (i.e. total loss of the car). DDR Number 10 dated 26.03.2010 was lodged by the petitioner with Police Post Cheema, District Sangrur. Petitioner himself was driving the car and having a valid driving licence. Intimation regarding accident was given to the office of respondents at Sangrur. A surveyor was deputed by the respondents to inspect the spot of accident. Since, petitioner's claim was not settled for 8 months, therefore, complaint was filed praying for directions to the respondents to pay Rs.1 lac as insured value of the car and Rs.50,000/- on account of mental tension and Rs.5,500/- on account of litigation expenses.

(3.) In their reply, respondents averred that at request of the previous owner- Joginder Singh, car was insured. It is further stated that petitioner should have informed the respondents within 14 days of purchase of the car, under section 157(2) of the Motor Vehicle Act 1988, which petitioner had not done. It is further averred, that claim of petitioner does not fall within the ambit of the policy, as Insurance Cover was available to Joginder Singh only. There was no agreement between the insurer and the transferee. Furthermore, no claim is payable to petitioner as per G.R. 17 of the India Motor Tariff, revised with effect from 01-07-2002. It is further stated that after receiving intimation on 26-03-2010 from petitioner, Er. Rajesh Aggarwal was appointed as surveyor, who submitted his report on 13-04-2010. Further, second surveyor Er. Pushpinder Kumar Garg, was appointed to assess the final loss to the vehicle, who recommended Rs.50,000/- on net salvage basis. The petitioner agreed to receive Rs.50,000/- towards full and final settlement of his claim vide Consent Letter dated 20-04-2010.