Uneducated Auto Driver’s Ignorance About Insurance Process is not any Ground To Deny Claim, Says Court
Simply because an uneducated and ignorant autorickshaw driver did not reach the motor insurance company in time after his vehicle was stolen, he can’t be denied his rightful claim money, a Bengaluru consumer court said during a recent order. The court ordered the private insurance company to pay the driver Rs 1 lakh with interest for his lost vehicle and a further Rs 5,000 towards his court expenses.
Lakshman Kempaiah, aged about 42 years, a resident of Magadi highway, drove an autorickshaw for a living. Kempaiah bought the vehicle about 3 years ago, and got it insured with Go Digit General Insurance Limited till March 13, 2021. On March 10, 2020, he went out of station after delivering the vehicle to fellow auto driver and friend Govindaraju, who had parked it outside his house. But by noon of March 14, 2020, Govindaraju came home to seek out the autorickshaw missing. He immediately called 100 and a Hoysala team from Vijaynagar police headquarters reached the spot and administered preliminary probe on the reported vehicle theft.
Govindaraju then visited the police station to lodge a complaint but was advised to return back later due to the escalating Covid situation. Cops said they’re going to alert him if they find the vehicle. Govindaraju informed Kempaiah about the incident and left for his village thanks to the lockdown.
Kempaiah wasn’t educated and was unclear about vehicle insurance policy norms. He, therefore, did not alert the insurance firm soon after the theft happened.
He approached an area agent near Rajajinagar RTO, who helped him get an FIR registered after 73 days of the theft. Eight days later, he approached Go Digit General Insurance representatives in Bengaluru. However, citing the delay in alerting the insurance firm , Go Digit denied Kempaiah his rightful claim of Rs 1 lakh for his autorickshaw, which was his only source of income.
With no other reasonable explanation given to him, Kempaiah sent a legal notice to the company’s general manager in Koramangala Industrial Layout with the assistance of a lawyer and approached Bangalore 1st additional district consumer disputes redressal commission in Shantinagar for relief.
In litigation that commenced, Kempaiah’s lawyer presented his case. Counsel representing Go Digit General Insurance argued that the delay in registering an FIR and intimating the insurance firm hampered their investigation in ascertaining if the auto was indeed stolen. There was no reasonable explanation given by the complainant for the delay and hence, the claim was rightfully repudiated.
In proceedings lasting on the brink of 14 months, judges of the consumer forum slammed the insurance company for not paying heed to the auto driver, who claimed he wasn’t a well-versed person and will not understand the implication of not intimating the insurance company about the vehicle theft.
“Since the complainant is an auto driver who might not be knowing the intricacies and therefore the implication of the conditions laid down, this court considers his act unintentional and with none mala fide intention,” the court observed. The judges came to the opinion that the repudiation of the claim amounted to deficiency in commission and unfair trade practice on the company’s part.