Signing Discharge Voucher Does Not Prevent Insured Parties From Pursuing Claims : NCDRC Holds Bajaj Allianz Insurance Liable For Deficiency In Service

The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, presided by Justice Karuna Nand Bajpayee and Dr. Sadhna Shanker, held that the denial of an insurance claim merely on the basis that the insured signed discharge vouchers is arbitrary and amounts as deficiency in service. Brief Facts of the Case The complainant insured their car with Bajaj Allianz Insurance/insurer for Rs. 4,43,800. During the policy period, the vehicle met with an accident, resulting in overall damage. Despite claiming the full insured amount, the insurer pressured the complainant into accepting Rs. 2,00,000 and signing a consent letter under duress. The complainant stated that the vehicle was totally damaged hence they're entitled to receive the full insured sum of Rs. 4,43,800. Being aggrieved, the complainant filed a complaint before the District Commission, which allowed the complaint. The district commission directed the insurance company to pay the remaining amount of Rs. 2,43,800 with interest at the rate of 8% per annum and Rs.5,000 as litigation costs. Consequently, the insurance company filed an appeal before the State Commission of Uttar Pradesh, which allowed the appeal and set aside the District Commission's order. Dissatisfied, the complainant filed a revision petition before the National Commission. Contentions of the Insurance Company The insurance company argued that the surveyor's findings indicated the nature and cause of the damages did not align, and there was no independent witness or towing details to support the claim. Upon the complainant's request, the matter was reconsidered, and the loss was assessed at Rs. 2,00,000. The complainant agreed to this amount as full and final settlement, signing a consent letter and retaining the salvage value of the damaged car. The insurance company argued there was no deficiency in service on its part. Observations by the National Commission The National Commission observed that the main issue was whether the insurance company was absolved of liability after the complainant signed the consent letter. It was undisputed that the policy was valid at the time of the accident. The Commission highlighted that the insurance company's argument of the complainant's signing of the discharge voucher precluding further claims does not hold ground as the IRDA guidelines clarify that a discharge voucher does not bar policyholders from seeking additional compensation through judicial or legal forums. The Commission referred to case of M/s Rainbow Apparels vs. New India Assurance Co. Ltd., wherein it was ruled that signing a discharge voucher does not prevent the insured parties from pursuing further claims with the insurer. In this case, the insurer settled the claim for Rs. 2,00,000 but provided no clear basis for this amount, despite an unchallenged repair estimate of Rs. 8,31,102 and an insured declared value of Rs. 4,43,800. The Commission concluded that the complainant's claim should have been treated as a total loss under policy terms. Hence, the National Commission set aside the oder by the State Commission and upheld the District Commission's decision. It directed the insurer to pay Rs. 2,43,800 with 8% interest along with Rs. 5,000 as litigation costs. Case Title: Mohd. Mukhtar Vs. Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd. Case Number: R.P. No. 168/2018 Click Here To Read/Download The Order

Signing Discharge Voucher Does Not Prevent Insured Parties From Pursuing Claims : NCDRC Holds Bajaj Allianz Insurance Liable For Deficiency In Service

Ayushi Rani

Tags