Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

Judgement Key Points

Key Points: - (!) The District Forum granted relief to complainant No.1 for insurance claim amount, interest, compensation, and costs, noting insurable interest arose on filing for transfer of ownership and that the accident occurred before RC transfer was completed. (!) - (!) The Commission upheld the Forum’s order, dismissing the appeal as devoid of merit and confirming the relief awarded to the complainant. (!) - (!) It was observed that GR17 of the All India Motor Tariff requires transferee to intimate the insurer and apply for transfer within 14 days of vehicle transfer; however, the Forum found insurable interest created on the date of filing for transfer, and the insurer did not show proof of denial of claim based on lack of insurable interest within that period. (!) - (!) The appellant insurer argued based on Bajaj Allianz Insurance Co. Ltd. v Mohammad Umar, but the Forum distinguished that case as distinguishable and ruled no interference. (!) - (!) The final order states the appeal is dismissed at preliminary stage with no costs and the District Forum’s order upheld. (!)

What is the extent of insurer's liability when insurable interest exists only after transfer of ownership but the accident occurs before transfer is completed?

What are the rights and obligations of the insured and insurer under GR17 of the Indian Motor Tariff in the context of vehicle ownership transfer?

What is the standard of review and outcome for an appeal when the District Forum’s order partially grants relief for an insured against an insurance company?

Cause Title/Judgement-Entry

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

UT CHANDIGARH

First Appeal No. A/296/2016

(Arisen out of Order Dated 19/08/2016 in Case No. CC/460/2012 of District DF-II)

1. HDFC ERGO Gen. Ins. Co. Ltd.

...........Appellant(s)

Versus

1. Paramjit Singh

...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE:
	HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Jasbir Singh PRESIDENT
	DEV RAJ MEMBER
	PADMA PANDEY MEMBER

For the Appellant:

For the Respondent:

Dated : 27 Oct 2016

Final Order / Judgement

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

U.T., CHANDIGARH

Appeal No.	:	296 of 2016
Date of Institution	:	25.10.2016
Date of Decision	:	27.10.2016

HDFC ERGO General Insurance Co. Limited, SCO No. 124-125, Sector 8-C, Madhya Marg, Chandigarh, and 5^th Floor, Tower-1, Stellar IT Park, C-25, Sector-62 Noida-201301 through Pankaj Kumar Manager-Legal.

……Appellant

V e r s u s

Paramjit Singh, resident of House No.2414, BSNL Society, Sector 50, U.T. Chandigarh.
Jashan Brar, resident of House No. 452, Sector 46-A, U.T. Chandigarh.

....Respondents

Swami Automotives Pvt. Limited, Plot No.72, Industrial. Area-1, Chandigarh, through its Director/ Branch Head.

…Proforma respondent

Appeal under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection

Act, 1986.

BEFORE: JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH (RETD.), PRESIDENT.

MR. DEV RAJ, MEMBER.

MRS. PADMA PANDEY, MEMBER

Argued by: Mr. Vishal Aggarwal, Advocate for the appellant.

PER JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH (RETD.), PRESIDENT

This appeal has been filed by the appellant/Opposite Party No.1(in short the OP No.1) against an order dated 19.8.2016 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-II, U.T., Chandigarh (in short the Forum only), allowing a complaint filed by respondent No.1& 2/complainants.

As per admitted facts on record, respondent No.1/complainant No.1 purchased a car bearing registration No.CH01AK-0452 from respondent No.2/ complainant No.2 on 26.3.2012. The said car was insured with the appellant/OP No.1 for the period between 24.10.2011 to 23.10.2012(midnight) against the Insured Declared Value (IDV) to the tune of Rs.8,02,892/-. Complainant No.1 moved an application to the Registering and Licensing Authority, U.T. Chandigarh on 29.3.2012 for transfer of ownership of the car in his name. The requisite fee was deposited against receipt annexure C-3. On the receipt, a note was given that the new owner may collect the registration certificate on 30.5.2012. The car met with an accident on 20.5.2012. It was being driven by a person having valid driving licence. Intimation was sent to OP No.1. The car was taken to the workshop of respondent No.3/OP NO.3 and an estimate of Rs.6,00,246.48p was issued for repair. After repair, final bill was raised for an amount of Rs.2,82,000/- on 2.8.2012. In the meantime, survey of the vehicle was conducted by a surveyor appointed by OP No.1. Amount towards repair of car i.e. Rs.2,82,000/- was paid by complainant No.1. Claim raised by complainant No.1 was rejected by OP No.1 stating that on the date of accident i.e. 20.5.2012, the insurance policy had not been transferred from the name of complainant No.2 to the name of complainant No.1, as such he was not having any insurable interest in the car in question. It was positive case of complainant No.1 that after purchase of the car on 26.3.2012, within 3 days on 29.3.2012, an application was moved before the competent authority to transfer its ownership. On the receipt issued for deposit of fee, it was mentioned by the concerned officer that the registration certificate may be collected on 30.5.2012. It was stated that before issuance of registration certificate, there was no occasion with complainant No.1 to move an application to OP No.1 to get the insurance policy transferred in his favour.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document