Bajaj Allianz Failed To Prove Car Owner’s Negligence, Bolangir Commissions Order Rs. 5.8 Lacs Insurance, Rs. 40k For Mental Agony And Rs. 5k Litigation Costs

Brief Facts:

Swapnashish Panna (“Complainant”), is the owner of a Maruti Suzuki Dezire VXI car and had purchased the vehicle on 11.09.2020, through a financing arrangement with Cholamandalam Investment and finance co Ltd. The vehicle was insured with Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Ltd. (“Insurance Company”). The insurance policy was valid from 11.09.2021 to 10.09.2022. On 15/03/2022, while the complainant was shopping at a mall in Sambalpur, the vehicle suddenly caught fire and was completely burnt. The complainant filed a claim with the Insurance Company for the damages. However, the insurance company repudiated the claim through a letter dated 22.06.2022.

The complainant contended that the fire was accidental and not a result of any criminal activity. He claimed that he had fully cooperated with the insurance company regarding the claim settlement, but the company had unjustifiably repudiated the claim. Resultantly, the complainant filed a complaint in the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bolangir (“District Commission”).

The insurance company denied the allegations and presented the argument that the fire was due to unauthorized modifications to the vehicle's electrical system. They referred to the technical report from the manufacturer and the surveyor's assessment as evidence. They contended that the claim was rightly repudiated and that the complainant was not entitled to the claimed compensation.

Observations of the Commission:

The District Commission found that the fire that broke out in the complainant's vehicle was accidental and not due to any negligence on his part. The District Commission also found that the Insurance company had failed to prove that the complainant had tampered with the electrical system of the vehicle, as alleged by them. It further held that the compensation amount assessed by the surveyor was unreasonable and that the complainant was entitled to a higher compensation. The District Commission also took into account the fact that the Insurance Company had delayed in settling the claim, which had caused the complainant mental agony.

After assessing the evidence and principles of justice, the District Commission ruled in favour of the complainant. The Insurance company was directed to pay him Rs.5,80,258/- with 9% annual interest from the incident till the order. Additionally, they were to provide Rs.40,000/- for mental agony and Rs.5,000/- for litigation expenses within a month.

Case: Sri Swapnashish Panna vs The Head of the Department Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd

Case No.: CC/45/2022

Advocate for the Complainant: Malaya Ranjan Gadatya and Others

Advocate for the Respondent: Lingaraj Padhi and Others

Click Here o Read/Download Order