Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rohtak.

                                                                   Complaint No. : 10

                                                                   Instituted on     : 03.01.2023

                                                                   Decided on       : 01.03.2024

Inder Singh Hooda s/o Sh. Jage Ram R/o H.No.42/9, Gali No.3, Vasant Vihar, Rohtak.

                                                                   ……….………….Complainant.

                                      Vs.

Arpit Claim Officer, Shri Ram General Insurance  Company  Ltd. E-8j , EPIP, RIICO, Sitapur, Jaipur(Raj.)302022 , Email ID arpit.shiramgi.in. Phone nos. of officers of company 0141-4951142 R.P.Sharma, 0141-4951138 Sh. Ram Yadav(Senior) Officer, 0141-4951140, 0141-3928400.

                                                          ...........……Respondent/opposite party.

          COMPLAINT U/S 35 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT.

BEFORE:  SH.NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT.

                   DR. TRIPTI PANNU, MEMBER.

                   DR. VIJENDER SINGH, MEMBER

Present:       Complainant in person.

                   Sh.Sudhir Kumar, Advocate for the opposite party.

                                      ORDER

NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT:

1.                Brief facts of the case as per the complainant are that he got insured his car bearing no.HR-12AJ-6013 vide policy No.10019/31/22/098143. On 26.08.2022 two members of the complainant had died in the roadside accident . Spot survey of the accidental vehicle was got done. Due to non availability of charge sheet of case, papers related to claim could not be got available  and the same were received from Police Station Niwadi, Gaziabad(UP). Complainant made a call on toll free number of the company for final survey of the vehicle.  Complainant made so many calls to the claim officer and other senior officers of the company. He also uploaded the documents on the email ID of the company and also on the email id of officers. Opposite party assured the complainant to pass the claim upto 28.12.2022 and to send the claim amount in the account of complainant.  But despite repeated requests of the complainant, claim has not been passed by the opposite party and opposite party has harassed the complainant. Hence this complaint and it is prayed that opposite party may kindly be directed to pass the insurance claim in favour of the the complainant.  

2.                After registration of complaint, notice was issued to the opposite party. Opposite party in its reply has submitted that the claim has been filed on the wrong facts and the material facts have been concealed by the complainant. In fact the complainant has not completed the required and requisite formalities to process the claim and opposite party’s officials wrote many registered letters to the complainant on dated 15.09.2022, 29.09.2022, 06.10.2022 and 18.10.2022 for submitting the relevant documents and clarifications.  As per surveyor report, the complainant has suffered a loss of Rs.286750/-. The surveyor has submitted his preliminary survey report, considering the damages on superficial basis & without dismantling of IV for Rs.286750/- which is more than 75% of IDV & may further increase on actual repairs of damaged vehicle. Since liability exceeds 75% of the IDV so the claim deemed fit for constructive total Loss as per policy terms and conditions.   On independent valuation of the vehicle, wreck in as it is condition they fetched a value of Rs.210000/- and the final calculation, would be as under for ready reference subject to admissibility of the claim.

It is further submitted that as per the complainant’s version his vehicle met with an accident on 26.08.2022 and he intimated the same in the office of opposite party on 08.09.2022 i.e. after a considerable delay of 13 days and delay was not explained in any manner. So the complainant has constitute serious breach of terms and conditions of the policy. Hence the claim of the complainant has been repudiated by the opposite party.

3.                Ld. counsel for complainant in his evidence has tendered affidavit Ex.CW1/A, documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C31 and closed his evidence on dated 18.08.2023. Ld. Counsel for opposite party has tendered affidavit Ex.RW1/A, documents Ex.R1 to Ex.R5 and closed his evidence on 22.12.2023. 

4.                We have heard the complainant as well as learned counsel for the opposite party and have gone through material aspects of the case very carefully.

5.                We have perused the documents placed on record by both the parties. As per respondent officials they wrote 4 letters dated 15.09.2022, 29.09.2022, 06.10.2022 and finally on 18.10.2022. On the other hand, the complainant submitted the required documents and information for processing the claim of the complainant and did not receive any letter from the opposite party. We have minutely perused the documents placed on record by both the parties. These letters have not been supported with courier or postal receipt. The complainant’s vehicle met with an accident on 26.08.2022 and in this accident two persons namely Pushpender Kumar and Deepak Hooda had died. An FIR bearing no.0171 dated 26.08.2022 was also got registered  regarding this accident in P.S. Niwadi District Gaziabad u/s 279, 337, 338 and 304 IPC.  The complainant never received any letter from the respondent officials for submitting the required documents. He had already submitted the required documents and informed the opposite party through email to Arpit and at the toll free number of the company at Chandigarh He also intimated the claim officer on his mobile no.7734896943. The complainant has deposited all the relevant documents submitted with the insurance company but the claim has not been paid to the complainant. Hence there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite party and opposite party is liable to pay the claim amount to the complainant. At the time of arguments some documents ‘Annexure JN-R2 to Annexure JN-R6’ have also been placed on file to prove the fact that he had already repaid the loan amount of vehicle in question. As per ‘Annexure-JNR4 and Annexure JNR-5’,   the ICICI bank has terminated the agreement and issued form 35 regarding the vehicle in question. The complainant also placed on record ‘Annexure-JNRA’ a payment receipt of termination of hypothecation with ICICI Bank vide receipt dated 26.02.2024 issued by the Transport Department. The perusal of this document reveals that the loan amount has already been repaid by the complainant to the ICICI Bank Ltd.  As per the written statement, affidavit and Ex.R5 the insurance company came into the conclusion that the vehicle is total loss. As per surveyor report itself without dismantling the insured vehicle the repair cost of vehicle is  Rs.286750/- so after considering the vehicle under total loss the insurance company evaluated the salvage value as Rs.248000/-. Insurance policy is placed on record by the complainant but the same has not been exhibited.  We have marked the same as ‘Annexure-JNR7’. The perusals of this document  itself shows that the IDV of the vehicle was Rs.331060/-. As per surveyor, the repair cost without dismantling the vehicle comes to Rs.286760/- but we are very surprised to see that net liability of the insurance company is assessed as Rs.82060/-  and the insurance company considered the salvage value of the vehicle as Rs.248000/- without any basis. The vehicle is not repairable, how the company came into the conclusion that the net insurable liability comes to Rs.82060/-. On the other hand the surveyor itself states that cost of the repair of the vehicle comes to Rs.286750/- and net liability of the insurance company comes to Rs.286750/-. The calculation of insurance liability as Rs.82060/- is without any basis and not supported with any authenticated reason and illegal. All the required documents have already been submitted  by the complainant with the opposite parties.  As such the complainant is entitled for the claim as per IDV of the vehicle  i.e. Rs.331060/-   after deducting the salvage value  which we have assessed as Rs.31060/-. Hence, opposite party is liable to pay Rs.300000/-(Rs.331060/- less Rs.31060/-) to the complainant.

6.                In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, we hereby allow the complaint and direct the opposite party to pay the amount of Rs.300000/-(Rupees three lac only) alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing the present complaint i.e. 03.01.2023 till its realisation and shall also pay Rs.10000/-(Rupees ten thousand only) as compensation on account of deficiency in service and Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand only) as litigation expenses to the complainant within one month from the date of decision. However, complainant is directed not to repair or use the vehicle and to move an application for cancellation of RC with the Registration Authority.

7.                Copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced in open court:

01.03.2024.

                                                          ........................................................

                                                          Nagender Singh Kadian, President

                                                          ..........................................

                                                          Tripti Pannu, Member.

                                                          ……………………………….

                                                          Vijender Singh, Member