ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs. PALLA VENKATA RAMANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by the order in C.C.No.97/2006 on the file of District Forum, Srikakulam, opposite party No.1 preferred this appeal.

(2.) The brief facts as set out are that complainant Smt.P.Kameswari purchased a Tractor cum Trailor AP 30U 2372 with engine No.NCPW 1397 and insured the tractor for Rs.3,35,000/- and trailor for Rs.91,000/- with opposite party no.1 under policy bearing No.433201/200573517 with effect from 28-1-2005 to 27-1-2006. The complainants mother died on 08-11-2005 and the same was informed to opposite party no.1 over phone and under certificate of posting on 23-11-2005 and requested the opposite party No.1 to transfer the policy in favour of the complainant. In the meanwhile the tractor cum trailor met with an accident on 13-1-2005 and it was damaged completely and the complainant informed the same to opposite party No.1 who deputed a surveyor to inspect the vehicle and the accident spot and the complainant was instructed to take the tractor to Mahindra Show Room i.e. Sri Rama Auto Service, Srikakulam for estimation of damage and they estimated the loss at Rs.2,28,989/- and the surveyor also estimated the same. It is the case of the complainant that he submitted the claim form along with relevant documents but opposite party No.1 has not paid the amount till today and the tractor was kept idle in the show room without effecting repairs to the same and the complainant has no financial capacity to repair the damaged vehicle. The complainant further submitted that they have taken finance from Allahabad bank with an agreed rate of interest of 10.5% p.a. and is not able to pay the instalments and also interest of Rs.2,700/- per month to the bank and suffering loss of income of Rs.15,000/- per month and the opposite party No.1 is not paying the insured amount and so he got issued a letter dated 27-4-2006 to settle the claim with interest and thereafter got issued a legal notice dated 29-5-2006 and failed to give any reply. Hence the complaint for a direction to party No.1 to pay Rs.2,28,989/- towards the insured accident vehicle claim together with interest at 24% p.a. from 01-6-2006 till the date of realization or to pay Rs.3,35,000/- towards the cost of the insured amount of the damaged tractor together with compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- and costs of Rs.2,000/-

(3.) Opposite party No.1 admitted insuring the tractor with trailor AP 30U 2372 from 28-1-2005 to 27-1-2006 by its owner Smt.Paila Kameswari and contended that it came to know about the accident on 12-1-2006 and the same was not signed by the policy holder. It further submitted that it came to know about the death of the owner-cum policy holder by notices dated 29-5-2006 and 10-7-2006 and the fact of the death of the insurer was not mentioned in the report of the accident duly signed by the complainant. Opposite party No.1 submitted that since the death of the insured was informed by way of the above notices, the contract of insurance ceased and there was no contract of insurance policy with effect from 08-11-2005 in respect of the Tractor cum Trailor and the complainant is not entitled to the ownership of the said tractor cum trailor and it was in the name of the policy holder and on the event of her death, the complainant should abide by the rule provided under GR 17 and as the complainant has not complied with GR 17, he is not entitled to claim Rs.2,28,989/-. It further submitted after intimation of the accident on 12-1-2006 by the complainant, they deputed a spot surveyor, T.Srimannarayana, for spot survey and he submitted a report on 19-1-2006 assessing at Rs.1,79, 275/- from Sri Ram Auto Service and as the estimation repairs exceeds the financial authority of opposite part No.1, they referred the matter to Divisional Office for final survey. The Divisional Officer appointed another surveyor, Smt.G.Durga Prasad for final survey and he assessed the loss for Rs.1,65,010-35 ps. and submitted the report on 9-2-2005. They submitted that there is no cause of action of action and the complaint is not maintainable and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.