RAVINDRA CHUNILAL KALAL Vs. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO LTD & ANR
MAHARASHTRA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
Ravindra Chunilal Kalal
United India Insurance Co Ltd And Anr
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) FEELING aggrieved by the dismissal order dated 28.2.2007 passed by Additional District Consumer Forum, Pune, original complainant has come up in appeal. We heard appellant in person, Advocate Mr. A.S. Vidyarthi for respondent No. 1 and Mr. A.P. Parlikar, Advocate for respondent No. 2.
(2.) THE vehicle manufactured by M/s. Tata Motors Ltd. met with an accident. Vehicle was insured. Claim was lodged with the Insurance Co. Insurance Company paid the assured sum to M/s. Tata Motors Ltd. and took possession of the vehicle. Insurance Company called tenders to sell the damaged vehicle. In response to the public tender, the appellant offered highest bid. Highest bid offered by the appellant was accepted by the Insurance Company. Insurance Company sold the vehicle to the appellant for Rs. 3,51,125. Vehicle was delivered to the appellant. Appellant approached RTO for registration. However registration was refused for want of road worthiness certificate (Form No. 22). The prayer for refund of money was turned down by the Insurance Company. Therefore, appellant filed consumer complaint in the District Consumer Forum.
(3.) INSURANCE Co. and M/s. Tata Motors Ltd. opposed the consumer complaint. Insurance Company took a stand that the vehicle was sold as a salvage 'As is and where is basis' in public auction. It was a scrap vehicle. It is further contended by the Insurance Co. that Insurance Co. is not under obligation to issue Sale certificate (Form No. 21) and Road worthiness certificate (Form No. 22).
M/s. Tata Motors Ltd. contended that there was no privity of contract between purchaser and M/s. Tata Motors Ltd. and therefore complaint should be dismissed as against M/s. Tata Motors Ltd.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.