Haryana

Sonipat

582/2012

1. SOMVIR S/O RAM SAROOP - Complainant(s)

Versus

1. RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,2. GOLDEN MULTI SERVICE CLUB LTD. - Opp.Party(s)

NARENDER KUMAR SHARMA

26 Nov 2013

ORDER

 

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,

SONEPAT.

               

 

                                Complaint No.582 of 2012

                                Instituted on:26.11.2012

                                Date of order:21.01.2015

 

Somvir son of Ram Savroop, resident of village and post office Barout, tehsil Gannour, Distt. Sonepat.

 

                                                …Complainant.         

                           Versus

 

 

1.(Policvy Service Branch Office) Reliance General Ins. Co. Ltd., 49, Dobson road, 2^nd Floor, Howrah-711101.

2.Group Manager, Golden Multi Services Club Ltd., SB Mansion, 16 RN Mukherjee road, Kolkata-700001 having Branch Office Atlas road, Sonepat through its Manager.

                                                …Respondent.

 

                COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 12 OF

                THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986

 

Argued by: Sh. Narender Kumar Sharma, Advocate for Complainant.

           Sh. Joginder Kuhar, Advocate for respondent no.1.

           Sh. Rajesh Dagar, Adv.for respondent no.2.

 

Before-    Nagender Singh-President.

          Prabha Wati-Member.

           D.V.Rathi-Member.

 

O R D E R

 

          Complainant has filed the present complaint against the respondents alleging therein that the respondents have issued an policy of Rs.3 lacs vide certificate no.015671266/703090239372Y1 for the period w.e.f. 1.9.2011 to 31.8.2012 from  respondent no.1 through respondent no.2.  The complainant unfortunately fell down by slipping of his leg in a Haudi/Well and sustained injuries.  Due to that injuries, he become 100% disable.  All the necessary documents for the claim purposes were deposited with the respondent no.2, but the claim was denied by the respondents.  So, he has come to this Forum and has filed the present complaint.

2.        The respondents no.1 and 2 have appeared and they filed their separate written statement.

          The respondent no.1 in its written statement has submitted that the complainant has not provided relevant documents necessary for the settlement of the claim and in the absence of the necessary documents, claim of the complainant could not be settled.   The respondent has issued the repudiation letter dated 11.6.2012 to the complainant. The complainant is not entitled for any relief and compensation and thus, prayed for the dismissal of the present complaint.

          In reply, the respondent no.2 has submitted that in no way, does Golden Multi Services Club Ltd. act as the insurer nor does it step in the insurer’s shoes.   The respondent no.2 can never be liable to settle the claim of the complainant.  The authority to settle the insurance claim lies solely with the respondent no.1. All the relevant documents submitted by the complainant were submitted to the respondent no.1.  It is the respondent no.1 who has repudiated the claim of the complainant vide letter dated 11.6.2012. So, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the respondent no.2 and thus, prayed for the dismissal of the present complaint qua respondent no.2.

3.        We have heard the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for both the parties at length. All the documents have been perused very carefully and minutely.  We have also gone through the written arguments submitted by the learned counsel for the respondent.

4.        Ld. Counsel for the complainant has argued that the respondents have issued an policy of Rs.3 lacs vide certificate no.015671266/703090239372Y1 for the period w.e.f. 1.9.2011 to 31.8.2012 from  respondent no.1 through respondent no.2.  The complainant unfortunately fell down by slipping of his leg in a Haudi/Well and sustained injuries.  Due to that injuries, he become 100% disable.  All the necessary documents for the claim purposes were deposited with the respondent no.2, but the claim was denied by the respondents and that amounts to a grave deficiency in service on the part of the respondents.

          Ld. Counsel for the respondent no.1 and 2 have also argued their case vehemently.

          But after hearing the learned counsel for the parties at length and after going through the entire relevant record available on the case file, we are of the view that the complainant is not entitled to get any kind of relief qua the respondents.  There is no FIR or DDR in support of the case of the complainant. Whereas as per terms and conditions of the insurance policy, the documents which have been submitted in respect of personal accident claim would include medical reports, disability certificate, FIR and final police report. In case of death claim, FIR/Final police report, death certificate and post mortem report must be submitted within 90 days.  But it is very sorry state of affairs that the complainant has failed to produce none of the documents mentioned above before the insurance company.

          However, during the pendency of the case on 19.1.2015, ld. Counsel for the complainant has filed an application for leading evidence by way of placing on record the affidavit of Ved Parkash alongwith supporting documents.  The complainant has tendered the affidavit of Ved Parkash,  one certificate issued by Ved Parkash Vaidh and medical certificate issued by Jain Hospital, Ganaur.  But this evidence is not helpful to the complainant and is not sufficient to prove any kind of deficiency in service on the part of the respondents.  Accordingly, it is held that the complainant has filed the false and frivolous complaint against the respondents with the motive to extract the amount of compensation, for  which, on the basis of the pleadings and evidence led by the complainant, the complainant is not entitled for any kind of relief.  In our view, the present complaint has no merit and thus, we dismiss the same with no order as to costs.

D

          Certified copy of this order be provided to both the parties free of cost.

File be consigned to the record-room.

 

 

(Prabha Wati)        (DV Rathi)                 (Nagender Singh-President)

Member DCDRF        Member DCDRF                   DCDRF, Sonepat.

 

Announced:21.01.2015