Kerala

StateCommission

A/14/574

the branch manager union bank of india - Complainant(s)

Versus

ali ap - Opp.Party(s)

r jagadish kumar

30 Jan 2016

ORDER

 

KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL

COMMISSION  VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

APPEAL NO. 574/14

 

JUDGMENT DATED: 30.01.2016

PRESENT : 

JUSTICE SHRI. P.Q. BARKATHALI                         :  PRESIDENT

SHRI.V.V JOSE                                                           : MEMBER

1. United India Insurance Company Ltd.,

           Rep. by its Manager, Seema Towers,                           

Bank Road, Mavoor Road Junction,

Kozhikkode.                                                                                   : APPELLANTS

 

2. United India Insurance Company Ltd.,

Rep. by its Branch Manager,

Rawther Buildings, Pinangode Road Junction,

Kalpetta, Wayanad.

 

(Appellants Repd. By T.Resmi,

Assistant Manager, United India-

Insurance Company Ltd., Divl. Office-1,

LMS Compound, TVPM.)

 

            Vs.

Ali.A.P, S/o Late Mossa,

Ariketti House, Thurkey Bazar,

Kalpetta Post and Village,                                                : RESPONDENT

Vythiri Taluk, Wayanadu.

 

(By Adv: Sri. S. Sudeep)

JUDGMENT

 

JUSTICE SHRI. P.Q. BARKATHALI:  PRESIDENT

 

This is an appeal filed by the opposite parties in CC.251/13 on the file of Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Wyanadu, Kalpetta challenging the order of the Forum dated, June 24, 2014 directing the opposite parties to pay to the complainant Rs.76,563/- towards repair charges of his bus which met with an accident along with a cost of Rs.2500/- and a compensation of Rs.2500/-.

2.      The case of the complainant as testified by him as PW1 before the Forum and as detailed in the complaint in brief is this:-

Complainant is the owner of bus bearing registration No.KL-12G-4242 with the route permit from Nilambur to Thirunelly.  The bus was insured with the opposite parties, insurance company for the period from March 21, 2012 to March 20, 2013.  On February 15, 2013 the bus met with an accident by colliding with a lorry causing heavy damage to the bus.  The bus was taken to Karur, Tamilnadu and was got repaired from Sri Chakra KPM Builders, Karur and Sree Anjaneya Chasis and Labour Works, Karur  spending about Rs.3,00,000/-.  Complainant is in possession of only bills worth Rs.2,78,879/-.  Out of the claim made by the complainant only Rs.1,02,000/- was sanctioned by the opposite parties.  Therefore complainant filed this complaint claiming balance amount and compensation.

3.      Opposite parties are M/s United India Insurance Company, represented by its Manager, Kozhikkode and its Branch Manager at Wyanadu.  They in their version contended thus before the Forum.  It is admitted that the bus belonging to the complainant was insured in the opposite parties company with a valid policy.  It is also true that the bus met with an accident on February 15, 2013.  The Surveyor deputed by this opposite parties assessed the damage as Rs.1,02,318/- only.  Out of this amount after depreciation opposite parties paid Rs.1,00,500/- to the complainant.  Therefore there is no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties.

4.      Complainant was examined as PW1 and Exts.A1 to A22 were marked on his side and on the side of the opposite parties Exts.B1 and B2 were marked before the Forum.  On an appreciation of evidence the Forum found that complainant is entitled to the entire repair charges incurred by him and directed the opposite parties to pay to the complainant Rs.76,563/- being the balance repair charges.  Forum has also directed the opposite parties to pay Rs.2,500/- as cost and Rs.2500/- as compensation.  Opposite parties have now come up in appeal challenging the said order of the Forum.

5.      Both the counsels were heard.

6.      The following points arise for consideration:-

1. Whether complainant is entitled to the entire repair charges incurred by him?
2. Whether there was any deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties?
3. Whether the impugned order of the Forum can be sustained?

 

7.      The total claim made by the complainant is Rs.2,78,879/-.  To prove his case he produced bills, Exts.A2 to A21.  Out of this the Forum discarded the bills Exts.A2 to A21.  After deducting Rs.1,00,500/- already paid, the Forum found that the amount due to the complainant is Rs.76,563/-.  The opposite parties paid only Rs.1,00,500/- towards repair charges.  Therefore there is clear deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties 1 and 2.  I find no ground to discard the above finding of the Forum.

8.      The counsel for the appellant mainly relied on the report of the surveyor Ext.B1 who assessed the damage as Rs.1,02,318/- but the said surveyor was not examined as a witness on the part of the opposite parties to prove the same.  That being so, the Forum is perfectly justified in not accepting the report of the surveyor regarding the expenses incurred for repairing the vehicle.

9.      The Forum has directed the opposite parties to pay to the complainant Rs.76,563/- towards balance repair charges of the vehicle of the complainant along with cost of Rs.2500/- and compensation of Rs.2500/-.  We find no ground to interfere with the said finding of the Forum.

In the result we find no merit in this appeal and the same is hereby dismissed with a cost of Rs.5000/-.

 

 

JUSTICE P.Q. BARKATHALI:  PRESIDENT

 

V.V JOSE  : MEMBER

 

VL.

 

font-size: 14.0pt;line-height:200%;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'> 

 

VL.