Dishonor of cheque inspite of sufficient fund amounts to deficiency in service
Dishonor of cheque inspite of sufficient fund
amounts to deficiency in service. No insurer shall assume any risk in respect
of insurance business until and unless the premium is received by the insurer.
In a Case No. 14/07 of Joginder Singh Vs. Vijaya
Bank and ICICI Lombard General
Insurance Co. Ltd., Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-II, Delhi directed
Vijaya Bank to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.54,288/- which was paid by the complainant for the repair of his vehicle due to
damage in an accident for the deficiency of service on the part of the Bank.
Besides Bank shall also pay a sum of Rs.20, 000/- as compensation for causing
him mental pain and agony.
Complainant insured his vehicle
with the ICICI Lombard on making a premium amount of Rs.26, 346/-.
After complainant’s said vehicle
met with an accident, a claim was lodged with Insurance Company for Rs.54, 288/-
which was repudiated. Complainant came to know that the insurance company could
not mature the payment of his cheque which was drawn on Vijaya Bank for an
amount of Rs.26, 346/-. Insurance Company stated that as per rule 4 of the IRDA
regulations 2002, no insurer shall assume any risk in respect of insurance
business until and unless the premium is received by the insurer. Insurance
company also stated that the cheque of the premium was dishonored and
therefore, the company was not liable to reimburse complainant for the amount
spent for the repair of his vehicle. Vijaya Bank dishonored the cheque based on
insufficient funds whereas complainant proved that he was having sufficient
funds to meet the payment of insurance for a sum of Rs.25, 346/- during the
month of September. The cheque for the premium was issued on 06/09/2006.
Between the period 04/09/2006 to 18/09/2006, the complaint has got a minimum
balance of Rs.1,09,928/-. District Consumer Redressal Forum observed that had
the bank been quite vigilant then the amount of premium of insurance would have
reached to the insurer which in turn would have been liable to compensate the
complainant for the repair of his vehicle because the vehicle met with an
accident within the period of insurance cover.
Comments
Post a Comment