Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Rohtak.
Complaint No. : 558.
Instituted on : 22.09.2017.
Decided on : 15.07.2020.
Ankit Gulia age 31 years, s/o Sh. Rajender Singh Gulia R/o A-67 Preet Vihar Colony, Rohtak.
………..Complainant.
Vs.
- Amazon India E-Mobiles Infrastructure Project 38 & 39 Soukya Road, Kachera Kanahall, Hoskope Taluka Ruual District Bangalore-560067.
- The New India Insurance Company NIACL, Mumbai H.O.CCDEPT-87, M.G.Road Fort Mumbai 022-22708306.
- MI Service center 36/16 Delhi Road, Model Town, Opp. CR Law College Rohtak.
……….Opposite parties.
COMPLAINT U/S 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986.
BEFORE: SH.NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT.
DR. RENU CHAUDHARY, MEMBER.
MS. TRIPTI PANNU, MEMBER.
Present: Sh.Nitin Goel, Advocate for the complainant.
Sh.Rajesh Sharma, Advocate for the opposite party. No.1.
Sh.Anil Sharma, Advocate for opposite party No.2.
Opposite party no.3 already exparte vide order dated 09.11.2017.
ORDER
NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT:
1. Brief facts of the case are that complainant had purchased a mobile of MI Redmi Note 3 from respondent no.1 having IMEI No.8626-28035768139 worth Rs.10900/- on dated 03.11.2016 and the same has been got insured on dated 10.11.2016 from the New India Assurance company i.e. respondent no.2. That on 24.01.2017, his motor cycle collided with another vehicle and as a result of which, he fell on the road. His mobile, which was in his pocket, also fell on the road and got physically damaged. After the accident, complainant approached respondent no.2 for claim and they approved and issued the claim no.SD50510541767. Complainant sent all the documents as required by the opposite party No.2 through emails dated 15.07.2017, 24.02.2017, 20.02.2017, 17.02.2017, 14.02.2017, 13.02.2017 and 10.02.2017 but to no effect. Complainant also served a legal notice upon the opposite parties but the same was not replied. There is deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties. As such it is prayed that opposite parties may kindly be directed to pay the amount of Rs.12000/- i.e. cost of insured mobile alongwith interest, compensation and litigation expenses to the complainant.
2. After registration of complaint, notice was issued to the opposite parties. Notice sent to opposite party no.3 received back duly served but none appeared on behalf of opposite party No.3 and as such OP No.3 was proceeded against exparte vide order dated 09.11.2017 of this Forum. Opposite party No.1 & 2 appeared and filed their separate written reply.
Opposite party no.1 in its reply has submitted that opposite party No.1 neither sells nor offers to sell any products and merely provides an online marketplace where independent third party sellers can list their products for sale. Opposite party No.1 is neither responsible for the products that are listed on the website by various third party sellers nor does it influence any customer in any manner. That opposite party has no role to play in the grievances held by the complainant and the present complaint merits dismissal qua the OP No.1. Opposite party no.2 in its reply has submitted that no proof of premium payment given by the insured to the answering respondent and as such no policy has been given to the insured/complainant by the New India Assurance Co. Ltd., so in these circumstances, without proof of premium payment, the claim is not entertained. No information regarding the damage of mobile was given by the complainant and complainant never lodged his claim with the answering opposite party. No emails have been given to the answering opposite party. So there is no deficiency in service on the part of opposite party and dismissal of complaint has been sought.
3. Ld. counsel for the complainant has tendered affidavit Ex.CW1/A, and documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C6 and closed his evidence on dated 12.04.2019. On the other hand, ld. counsel for OP No.1 has tendered affidavit Ex.RW1/A, documents Ex.R1 to Ex.R4 and closed his evidence on dated 03.06.2019. Ld. counsel for OP No.2 has tendered affidavit Ex.RW2/A, and closed his evidence on dated 30.08.2019.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through material aspects of the case very carefully.
5. After going through the file and hearing the parties it is observed that the claim of the complainant has been repudiated by the opposite party no.2 on the ground that neither the complainant has given any proof of premium payment nor the policy has been given to the insured/complainant by the New India Assurance Co. Ltd. On the other hand, complainant has placed on record copy of bill Ex.C1 and copy of screenshot of email dated 11.10.2016 Ex.C2, as per which it is clear that complainant has insured his mobile through The New India Assurance Company Limited vide master policy no.95000046161100000001 and had paid the premium of Rs.1099/- including the Damage insurance, Theft insurance, Pickup & Drop Service. As per claim form Ex.C3, complainant has informed the opposite party No.2 about the damage of his mobile set. Complainant has also placed on record copy of emails Ex.C4 to Ex.C6, as per which, complainant has requested the opposite parties to pay the claim amount but the same has not been paid to the complainant till date. From the documents placed on record by the complainant, it is proved that mobile of the complainant was insured with the opposite party no.2 and the same was physically damaged. Hence the repudiation of claim by the opposite party is illegal and amounts to deficiency in service. As such, opposite party no.2 is liable to pay the insured amount to the complainant.
6. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case we hereby allow the complaint and direct the opposite party No.2 to pay the insured sum of Rs.10999/- say Rs.11000/-(Rupees eleven thousand only) alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing the present complaint till its decision and shall pay a sum of Rs.3000/-(Rupees three thousand only) as compensation and litigation expenses to the complainant within one month from the date of decision.
7. Copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of costs.
8. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced in open court:
15.07.2020.
................................................
Nagender Singh Kadian, President
……………………………….
Renu Chaudhary, Member.
..........................................
Tripti Pannu, Member.
