Haryana

Ambala

CC/341/2016

Pardeep Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Avtar Singh - Opp.Party(s)

Vipul Sabharwal

16 Jan 2018

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AMBALA

                                                          Complaint case no.        : 341 of 2016.

                                                          Date of Institution         : 29.08.2016.

                                                          Date of decision   : 16.01.2018

 

Pardeep Singh son of Sh.Rameshwar r/o residing at Allaudinpur Tehisl Loharu District Bhiwani.

……. Complainant.

                                      Versus

 

1.Attar Singh Prop. Shubham Motor Insurance (United India Assurance) Chungi No.7, Bhiwani Road, Loharu, District Bhiwani through agent, Bharti Axia General Insurance Company.

2.Bharti Axa General Insurance Company Ltd. SCO-52 Second Floor, Urban Estate-II Hisar through Branch Manager/ Area Manager.

3.Bharti Axa General Insurance Company Ltd. (Reg.) 1^st Floor, Frans Icone, Survey No.28, Dodankundi, Outer Ring, Bangalore (Karnatka) through Manager.

4. Sh.Surender Dahiya,Prop.Authorised Management Service Ltd. D-Park Model Town, Near Apex School Medical Mod Rohtak Surveyor Bharti Axia General Insurance Company Ltd.

….…. Opposite parties.

BEFORE:   SH. D.N. ARORA, PRESIDENT

                   SH. PUSHPENDER KUMAR, MEMBER         

                   MS. ANAMIKA GUPTA, MEMBER                 

 

Present:       Sh.Vipul Sabarwal, counsel for complainant.

                   OP Nos.1 & 4 exparte.

                   Sh.M.Bindal, counsel for OP Nos.2 & 3.

 

ORDER:

                   Brief facts of the present complaint are that the complainant was owner of vehicle bearing registration No.PB02-AR/0074 and he got the same insured with OP No.2 through OP No.1 vide policy No.XAX/ S 9550701 on 10^th Jan 2013 for the period from 10.01.2013 to 09.01.2014 by paying a sum of Rs.6993/- as premium thereof. Unfortunately, the vehicle met with an accident on 20.08.2013 on Ambala-Kaithal highway about 20 kms away from Ambala towards Kaithal when the father of the complainant was driving the vehicle. The Op  No.1 was duly intimated on toll free No.18001032292 and further it was noted at No.F/0295888 on 20.08.2013. The Op No.2 had assured that the process of survey would be carried out soon but when no action had been taken then he got his car repaired from auto workshop in Bhiwani on 29.08.2013 by paying a sum of Rs.32,500/-. The complainant submitted the requisite document alongwith estimated bill and repairing bill with the OPs then on 07.10.2013 the OP No.4 appointed a surveyor who had visited the concerned place after repairing of the car. On 08.11.2013 the complainant sent an e-mail to the customer service department of OP No.2 for change of address then he was asked to visit Op No.2 for getting the address changed. The office of OP at Delhi provided an estimate of Rs.32,000/- after the assessment of damage of car due to accident. He accepted the claim amount of Rs.32,000/- on the instructions of Op on the condition that the claim amount would be increased substantially in future through e-mail on 08.11.2013 but he was taken by surprise when the Ops had rejected the claim through its letter dated 19.02.2014 on account of that no opportunity was given to them for inspection of accidental car which shows that they are denying the liability to indemnify the claim lodged with them. The complainant had earlier filed an application under Section 22 of Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, Bhiwani which was on 04.05.2015 on the point of jurisdiction. The act and conduct of the Ops clearly deficiency in service on their part.  In evidence, the complainant has tendered affidavit Annexure CX and documents Annexure C1 to Annexure C15.

2.                          On notice OP Nos.1 & 4 did not appear before this Forum despite issuance of registered notices, therefore, they were proceeded against exparte vide order dated 09.11.2016. OP Nos. 2 & 3 in their joint reply have   taken many preliminary objections such as cause of action, concealment of material facts and  territorial jurisdiction of this Forum etc. As per information, the accident had taken place on 20.08.2013 about 20 KMs away from Ambala on Ambala Kaithal highway and damaged car was parked  at M/s Raghu Hyundai, Bhiwani but when surveyor appointed by the insurance company visited the said workshop on 21.08.2013 and 22.08.2013 no such car was parked there for repair.  Thereafter the surveyor came to know that the complainant has already got the car repaired from a private workshop by spending a sum of Rs.32,500/-. On the description of repair given by father of complainant, the surveyor formally assessed the loss to the tune of Rs.16,200/- . However, the surveyor had visited the place at Bhiwani and also clicked the photographs of the car in question.  The claim of the complainant was rightly repudiated keeping in view the whole facts, situation, records and evidence. The estimate and bill had also looked false and fabricated because only after the physical inspection of the damaged vehicle the surveyor can assess the actual and legal loss.  There is no deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of OP Nos. 2 & 3. The appearing Ops have tendered affidavits Annexure RX and Annexure RY and documents Annexure R1 to Annexure R10.

4.                Before proceeding further and going into the merits of the case it is necessary to decide firstly whether this Forum has territorial jurisdiction to decide and entertain the present complaint or not?

5.                Learned counsel for the Ops has firstly resisted the complaint on the ground that this Forum has no territorial jurisdiction to decide and entertain the present complaint because there is nothing on the case file to show that any incident had ever taken place within the jurisdiction of this Forum.

6.                 On the other hand learned counsel for the complainant has argued that the accident in which the insured car got damaged had occurred around 20 KMs away from Ambala on Ambala Kaithal highway, therefore, this Forum has jurisdiction to decide and entertain the present complaint.

 

7.                          After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the material available on the case file the complainant has mentioned in his complaint that the accident had occurred on 20.08.2013 about 20 KMs away from Ambala on Ambala Kaithal highway but it is strange neither the complainant has got recorded any FIR nor DDR to show that the alleged damage to his insured car has occurred within the territorial jurisdiction of this Forum. It is a settled principle of law that mere assertion without any concrete evidence does not give have any value in the eyes of law. Moreover, it appears that the complainant instead of proving his case by leading cogent evidence is trying to take benefit of the weaklings of the OPs.  The complainant has also failed to prove on case file that as to how the car reached at workshop situated at Bhiwani which is around 200 KM away from this place had the accident had occurred around Ambala. Even otherwise, also if it is presumed that insurance company is having branch office at Ambala in that eventuality, this Forum has got no jurisdiction in the light of decision rendered by Hon’ble Apex Court in Civil Appeal No.1560 of 2004 titled as Sonic Surgical Vs.National Insurance Company Ltd. reported in 2010(1) Consumer Law Today page 252.  Hence, we hold that this Forum lacks territorial jurisdiction and thus we have no option except to dismiss the complaint.  However, the complainant is at liberty to file the complaint in the Forum having the jurisdiction. The complainant can have all the original documents, if any, relied upon in this case and the office is also directed to handover the same, if any, attached with the complaint against proper receipt & identification and after placing photocopy of the same on the case file. Exemption of time spent before this Forum is granted  in terms of the  judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case titled “ Laxmi Engineering Works versus PSG Industrial Institute  (1995) 3 SCC page 583.Copy of this order be sent to the complainant, free of cost, as per rules. File be consigned to the record room accordingly.

 

Announced on: 16.01.2018                                                                                                                          

 

(PUSHPENDER KUMAR)   (ANAMIKA GUPTA)     (D.N. ARORA)

       Member                                     Member                          President