STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION KERALA FIRST APPEAL NO. SC/32/A/360/2017 null NATIONAL INSURANCE CO PRESENT ADDRESS - Allikal shopping complex, Kozhikode road manjeri, Malappuram District-

676507 ,KERALA.

.......Appellant(s)

Versus USMAN PRESENT ADDRESS - Menakathodi house, Cherukuhamba , vattchoor P.O, Perinthalmanna, Malappuram ,KERALA.

.......Respondent(s)

BEFORE:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SRI.B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR , PRESIDENT HON'BLE MR. SRI.AJITH KUMAR.D , JUDICIAL MEMBER SRI.RADHAKRISHNAN.K.R , MEMBER FOR THE APPELLANT:

NEMO FOR THE RESPONDENT:

NEMO DATED: INVALID DATETIME

ORDER

KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM APPEAL No. 360/2017 JUDGEMENT DATED : 21.01.2025 (Against the order in C.C.No.316/2015 on the files of DCDRC, Malappuram)

PRESENT:

HON’BLE JUSTICE SRI. B. SUDHEENDRA : PRESIDENT KUMAR SRI. AJITH KUMAR D. : JUDICIAL MEMBER SRI. K.R. RADHAKRISHNAN : MEMBER APPELLANT:

The Manager, M/s National Insurance Co. Ltd., Allikkal Shopping Complex, Kozhikode Road, Manjeri, Malappuram – 676 507 (by Adv. Prasanna Kumar Nair)

Vs.

RESPONDENT:

Usman, S/o Kunjimoideen, Mankarathodi House, Cherukulamba, Vattaloor

P.O., Perinthalmanna, Malappuram – 676 507

JUDGEMENT

HON’BLE JUSTICE SRI. B. SUDHEENDRA KUMAR : PRESIDENT The appellant is the opposite party in C.C.No.316/2015 on the files of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Malappuram (for short ‘the District Commission’), who in this appeal challenges the order passed by the District Commission, directing the opposite party to pay Rs.30,574/-(Rupees Thirty Thousand Five Hundred and Seventy Four only) to the complainant towards the repairing charges of the vehicle, Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand only) as compensation and Rs.5,000/-(Rupees Five Thousand only) as costs.

2. The complainant purchased a motor bike having registration No. KL 53 C

4870 from one Aneesh Babu on 29.11.2014. The vehicle had been transferred to the name of the complainant on 01.12.2014. The Registration Certificate was received by the complainant from the office of the RTO, Perinthalmanna on 10.12.2014. On 13.12.2014, his motor bike met with an accident by hitting against a car and as a consequence, the vehicle sustained heavy damage. The complainant got the motor bike repaired in an authorised service centre for Rs.30,574/-(Rupees Thirty Thousand Five Hundred and Seventy Four only). The complainant made a claim before the opposite party. However, the claim was repudiated by the opposite party stating that the insurance policy was not transferred to the complainant as on the date of accident even though the registration certificate was transferred to the name of the complainant.

In the said circumstances, the above complaint was filed alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party.

3. The opposite party filed version inter alia contending that even though the vehicle was transferred to the complainant on 29.11.2014, the insurance policy was not transferred to the name of the complainant on 13.12.2014, the date on which the accident occurred and hence the opposite party was not liable to pay any compensation to the complainant.

4. The proof affidavit was filed by the complainant and Exhibits A1 to A5 were marked for the complainant. Proof affidavit was also filed by the opposite party. Exhibits B1 to B11 were marked for the opposite party. After evaluating the evidence, the District Commission passed the order as mentioned above.

5. Service is complete. However, there is no representation for the respondent.

6. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and perused the records.

7. It is not disputed that the complainant purchased the vehicle in question on 29.11.2014 from one Aneesh Babu. It is also not disputed that the transfer was effected with effect from 29.11.2014 in the records in the Regional Transport Office as is evident from Exhibit B2. Exhibit B1 would show that the policy covering the vehicle was valid from 25.08.2014 to 24.08.2015.