Orissa

Kendujhar

CC/27/2015

Chittaranjan Barik - Complainant(s)

Versus

1. Branch Manager, The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. & Others - Opp.Party(s)

Sri R.R. Rana

11 May 2016

ORDER

IN THE COURT OF THE PRESIDENT DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KENDUJHAR

CONSUMER COMPLAINT CASE NO. 27 OF 2015

    Chittaranjan Barik, aged about 32 years,

    S/o- Babaji Charan Barik,

    At/Post- Suakati, P.S- Sadar,

    Dist- Keonjhar, Pin- 758018, Odisha              ……………………..Complainant

                     Vrs

1. Branch Manager,

    The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.

    Keonjhar Branch, At- Jagannathpur,

    Near RTO Office, P.O- Keonjhargarh,

    Dist-Keonjhar, Pin- 758001, Odisha

2. Divisional Manager,

    The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.

    Gaffor Colony, Udit Nagar, Rourkela,

    Sundargarh, Odisha                                         ……………………….Op. Parties

 

PRESENT: - Shri A.K. Purohit, President

                   Sri S.C. Sahoo, MEMBER

                  Advocate for the Complainant- Sri Rajesh Ranjan Rana

                  Advocate for the OPs- Sri Aswin Ku. Pattnaik

___________________________________________________________________________  

Date of Hearing- 30.03.2016                                                             Date of Order- 11.05.2016

Sri S.C. Sahoo, Member: The brief facts of the complaint are that the complainant had insured his vehicle OR-09-P-8644 with the OPs and the said vehicle was engaged in transportation works in order to maintain his family and the vehicle was financed by Cholamandalam Investment & Finance Co. Ltd. Keonjhar Branch, Keonjhar for his livelihood purpose. The alleged insured vehicle was duly insured with OP1 bearing Policy No.345505/31/2014/5835 and valid from 12/12/2013 to 11/12/2014. The alleged vehicle of the complainant had met with an accident at Gondijoda while returning from Meramundali side to Suakati after unloading iron ores. The accident was reported to Suakati Police outpost vide SDE No.09 of 1.10.2014 who conducted enquiry and verification of spot and on the same day the matter was reported to the OPs after which the surveyor was deputed by the OPs and surveyed on the spot and the surveyor advised the complainant to shift the accidental vehicle for necessary repair and later on the complainant took the alleged vehicle to Bharat Body Repairing Garage at Champua for repair by the help of a Towing vehicle in presence of the surveyor, dismantle work was done and the complainant handed over all the documents to OP1 as required by the insurer with a hope for early settlement of his own damage claim and even after completion of final survey and submission of all documents including total Expenditure Bills, Driving License of the driver and all vehicular documents like Permit, Fitness, Registration etc. were in order at the time of accident so as to indemnify the loss by the insurer. But the OPs remained silent for settlement of complainant’s genuine claim from which it was crystal clear that the OPs are deficient in rendering service and involved in unfair trade practice and the complainant had been put to great irreparable loss, mental agony and harassment by the OPs and hence, this complaint.                

      After service of notice, the OPs have appeared through their engaged counsel and filed their written version stating that the complaint is not maintainable under law & fact and there is no cause of action and bad for mis-joinder and non-joinder of parties and the case of the complainant having no merit liable to be dismissed and further stated in the version that delay as alleged by the complainant was due to his latches and the OPs have not intentionally or deliberately delayed and the allegation in the complaint was no way turn out to be a case of deficiency and the averments in the complaint with regards to insurance, accident and own damage pertaining to the alleged vehicle are the matters of record. The OPs have admitted that the alleged vehicle was insured with them and performed their duty to render best and expeditious service as exemplar from the spot survey. Photographs of insured vehicle and final survey report that the OPs have meticulously performed their duty as per the procedure of law and no way deficient in service and the OPs have stated that the complainant failed to submit some pertinent documents and the claim in question is yet to be settled and as delayed is due to fault of the complainant and hence, be dismissed with exemplary cost.

     Heard the learned counsels for the contesting parties and perused the materials available in record. It is not disputed by the contesting parties pertaining to the alleged accident of the vehicle and the only dispute as alleged by the OPs that the complainant has been failed to submit some pertinent documents to the claim in question which was yet to be settled as early as possible.  

     In this context, the learned counsel for the complainant has submitted that, soon after the accident the matter was reported to the local police vide SDE No.09 of 1.10.2014 and on the same day matter was also reported to the OPs and again through lawyer’s notice to OPs on dt.8.4.2015 & 18.5.2015. But no reply has been made till date in spite of submission of relevant papers/ documents with the OPs.

      On the other hand, the learned counsel for the OPs has submitted that the OPs have performed its duty as per the procedure and after getting information from the complainant about the alleged accident deputed the surveyor for spot survey. Photographs of insured/ accidental vehicle and final survey report, hence allegation like deficiency of service and unfair trade practice, causing mental agony claiming compensation amount of high amount from OPs are meaningless and fallacious to patch up complainant’s faults in order to take undue advantage.            

      With these pleadings, arguments and materials available in record it is believed that OPs have not produced any cogent evidence in order to prove their case nor have filed any affidavit evidence pertaining to fault of the complainant as failed to submit some pertinent/ reliable documents so as to enable to be settle the claims of the complainant which amounts to be liable for deficiency in service by the OPs.      

     Under these aforesaid discussion and materials available in record the OPs are liable to compensate the complainant.

HENCE ORDER

The OPs are directed to pay Rs.4,83,335/- (Rupees four lacks eighty three thousand and three hundred thirty five) towards own damage insurance claim of the alleged vehicle as per bills submitted by the complainant available in record inclusive of towing charges along with Rs.5000/- towards compensation for harassment and mental agony within 30 days of receipt of this order failing which the entire amount of Rs.4,88,335/- will carry on interest @ 10% p.a. till realization.              

          Accordingly, the Case is disposed of.

 

                                                                                                                    I agree                                                                                     

     (Sri S.C. Sahoo)                                                                             (Sri A.K. Purohit)                           

           Member                                                                                           President                               

 D.C.D.R.F Keonjhar                                                                         D.C.D.R.F Keonjhar

 

 

                                                                               Dictated & Corrected by me

                                                                                       (Sri S.C. Sahoo)

                                                                               Member, D.C.D.R.F Keonjhar