SK MANSUR ALI Vs. ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition has been filed under section 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the order dated 31.03.2017, passed by the Odisha State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (hereinafter referred to as 'the State Commission') in First Appeal No. 158/2015, "Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Sk. Mansur Ali", vide which, while dismissing the appeal, the order dated 02.12.2014, passed by the District Forum Sambalpur in consumer complaint No. 48/2013 was modified and a direction was given to the OP Insurance Company to pay the cost of repairs to the authorised repairers after making negotiations with them and bring the vehicle back in a running condition and give the same to the complainant within one month from the order. It was also directed that on failure to do so, payment of Rs. 3,03,963/- be made to the insured within one month.

(2.) The facts of the case are that the petitioner/complainant is the owner of a Tata Winger, LMV bearing registration No. OR15P 7588, which was duly insured with the opposite party (OP), the Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. The said vehicle was damaged in an accident on 08.12.2010. The vehicle was repaired by an authorised repairer M/s. Jalan Automobiles Private Limited, Sambalpur, but the Insurance Company failed to make payment of Rs. 3,03,963/- as demanded by the repairer. It was stated in the consumer complaint that the vehicle was still in the garage of authorised repairer, awaiting settlement of the repair bills by the Insurance Company. The complainant filed a complaint with the Insurance Ombudsman, which decided the same in his favour. It is alleged, however, that the Insurance Company failed to take appropriate action in terms of the orders of the Ombudsman. The consumer complaint in question was then filed, seeking directions to the Insurance Company to settle the repair bill directly with the repairer, so that the vehicle could be restored to the complainant and also to compensate the complainant for the loss suffered by him, resulting from the payment of interest on the loan instalments.

(3.) The complaint was resisted by the OP Insurance Company by filing a written version before the District Forum in which they denied the allegations against them, saying that the Insurance Company was not liable to indemnify the insured, because the insured did not have an effective driving licence at the time of the accident. Moreover, the Insurance Company was liable to pay the cost of repairs only in accordance with the terms and conditions of the policy.