Orissa

Kendujhar

CC/26/2015

Kanhayalal Jaiswal - Complainant(s)

Versus

1.Manager (Claims), IFFCO-TOKIO General Insurance Co. Ltd. & Others - Opp.Party(s)

Sri R.R. Rana

24 Jun 2016

ORDER

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

CONSUMER COMPLAINT CASE NO. 26 OF 2015

 

Kanhayalal Jaiswal, aged about 42 years,

S/o- Bijay Prasad Jaiswal,

At/P.O/P.S- Koira,

Dist- Sundargarh, Odisha & also At/P.O/P.S- Barbil,

Dist- Keonjhar-758035, Odisha                            ...……………………….Complainant                                  

                           Vrs.

1. Manager (Claims),

IFFCO- TOKIO General Insurance Co. Ltd.

Plot No. HIG-22, 1^st & 2^nd Floor, BDA Colony,

Opposite to Pal Height, Jaydev Vihar,

Bhubaneswar- 751013

2. Regional Manager (Claims),

IFFCO- TOKIO General Insurance Co. Ltd.

42A, 3^rd Floor, Shakespeare Sarani, Kolkata-17 ………..………………..Op. Parties

 

PRESENT- SRI AKSHAYA KUMAR PUROHIT, PRESIDENT

                   SRI S.C. SAHOO, MEMBER

Advocate for Complainant- Shri Rajesh Ranjan Rana

Advocate for OPs- Sri Aswin Kumar Pattnaik

__________________________________________________________________

Date of Hearing -17.05.2016                                               Date of Order - 24.06.2016

Sri S.C. Sahoo, Member: The brief facts of the case is that the complainant is having a TATA Truck bearing No. OR-09K-9301 to maintain his family/ livelihood engaged in transportation work and the alleged vehicle was insured with OPs vide Policy No.81264022 which was valid from 14.09.2012 to 13.09.2013 and in the mean while the alleged Truck of the complainant met an accident on 03.05.2013 at Balijodi under Koira Police station while returning from Barasuan Railway site after unloading Iron ores was damaged heavily and to this matter was reported to Koira Police station who registered in the station diary entry vide No.61 of 3.5.2013 and also reported to OPs of which claim was registered vide No.122K2JU after which the insurer sent their surveyor who conducted spot survey, took photographs and advised the complainant to shift the damaged truck for necessary repair with the help of a towing vehicle in presence of the surveyor and handed over the required documents to the surveyor for settlement of his own damage claim at the insurer’s end. But the OPs have caused deliberate delay in allowing the claim of the complainant and the complainant could repaired his vehicle on payment of repair cost of Rs.86,125/- by borrowing from friends and relatives as per assurance given by the OPs. But the OPs deliberately delayed for early settlement of own damaged claim for which the complainant was victimized by OPs for unfair trade practice and OPs are deficient in rendering their service to the complainant and hence this case,

       After service of notice to the OPs, the OPs have appeared through their counsel and filed their written version by stating that the present case as laid is not maintainable under law and fact and is bad for mis-joinder and non-joinder of parties and also there is no cause of action to file this case against the present OPs and has no merit hence liable to be dismissed and the allegation as made by the complainant on repudiation is not at all intentional or deliberate rather due to latches of the complainant and hence, the present case is not anyway turnout to be a case of deficiency of service and it is false that the surveyor deputed by the OPs to conduct survey, took photographs and advise the insured to shift the damaged vehicle to garage for repair in presence of the surveyor. But the surveyor could not get any opportunity to conduct spot survey since the alleged vehicle had already been shifted to garage while the appointed surveyor Sri S.K. Behera after reaching at garage seen that the damaged vehicle had already been dismantled for which S.K. Behera could not be able to assess the cause and loss items. Hence, from the above said reasons it is fact that the complainant had violated the terms and conditions of Policy and as such the claim in question was rightly closed and non-settlement of claim has been due to fault of the complainant and need to be dropped being devoid of any merit.

        Heard, both the counsels of the contesting parties. It is not disputed by the contesting parties pertaining to the alleged accident on 3.5.2013, but disputed by the OPs that the alleged accident as was occurred at Balijodi under Koira Police station lacks jurisdiction of this forum rather than coming under the jurisdiction of Sundargarh district since the cause of action arised there at Balijodi.

      In this context the learned counsel for the complainant submitted that the complainant is an inhabitant within the local limits of this forum and the OPs are reputed general Insurance company carrying business throughout the country directly through their branch and by engaging authorized agents in the area though no branch office establish at Barbil impleaded as parties for adjudication.

        On the other hand the learned counsel for the OPs has submitted that the cause of action was on 3.5.2013 i.e. the accident was taken place at Balijodi while the vehicle was returning from Barasuan Railway site under Koira Police station who conducted necessary investigation of the accident by registering as station diary entry No.61 on 3.5.2013 lacks jurisdiction of this forum as well as the OPs have neither resides nor carrying business or has a branch office or personally works for gains lacks jurisdiction for entertainment of the complaint under the C.P. Act-1986 read with the provisions of section 11(2)(c) of the act and U/s.12(1)(a) though the agent Paresh Kumar Behera as per Policy was not made as a party.

      On perusal of materials in records in this issue we have relied upon the provisions of section in the Act to hold that as the alleged accident was taken place at Balijodi under Koira Police station, the jurisdiction lies with the Sundargarh District Forum, further held that in terms of the provisions in section 11(2)(c) the jurisdiction would lie with the district forum where the cause of action arose in Balijodi under Koira Police station since the alleged accident had taken place and reported to the concerned Police station at Koira. Therefore, it is held that the District Forum, Keonjhar lacks jurisdiction to exercise over the consumer complaint i.e. in this present case. Hence, 

O R D E R

 

             The complaint petition of the complainant is dismissed as lacks Jurisdiction of this Forum.

                         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