Mysore District Commission Dismisses Complaint Against ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co.
Smita Singh
2 July 2024 2:15 PM GMT
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Mysore (Karnataka) bench of A.K. Naveen Kumari(President), M.K. Lalitha (Member) and Maruthi Vaddar (Member) dismissed a complaint against ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company for a personal accident cover, as the deceased driver was driving a borrowed vehicle. There was a lack of consumer-service provider relationship between the Insurance Company as the insurance policy was in the name of another insured person.
Brief Facts:
The Complainant's husband was riding a motorcycle which was insured under a policy purchased from the ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. (“Insurance Company”). The policy included a personal accident cover of Rs. 15,00,000/-. On December 1, 2021, the motorcycle collided with a wild pig on the road which resulted in severe injuries to the Complainant's husband, who later succumbed to these injuries. A police case was registered at Varuna Police Station following the incident.
Subsequently, the Complainant filed a claim with the Insurance Company including all necessary documents, after a private investigation by the Insurance Company. Despite repeated visits to its Mysore office, the Complainant received only oral assurances without any settlement offer from the Insurance Company. Feeling aggrieved, the Complainant filed a consumer complaint in the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Mysore, Karnataka (“District Commission”) against the Insurance Company.
In response, the Insurance Company denied awareness of the circumstances leading to the accident. It contended that the deceased was the borrower of the vehicle and argued that the vehicle was owned by the Complainant and that the personal accident cover was intended solely for her. It further disputed receiving the claim form and all necessary documents from the Complainant.
Observations by the District Commission:
The District Commission held that the Complainant did not adequately demonstrate the submission of a complete and accurate claim form, nor provided evidence of its receipt by the Insurance Company. Therefore, the District Commission held that there was no deficiency in service on the part of the Insurance Company regarding the handling of the claim.
Additionally, the District Commission addressed the Complainant's contention that the deceased husband, as the rider of the motorcycle, should be covered under the personal accident policy. The District Commission held that there was no legal relationship between the consumer and service provider between him and the Insurance Company. Therefore, the District Commission found the Complainant's claim regarding coverage under the personal accident policy to be unfounded.
Consequently, the District Commission dismissed the complaint.
Case Title: Nandini C.S. vs The Manager (Legal), M/s ICICI Lombard Gen
Case Number: 218/2022
Date of Pronouncement: 27.05.2024
