BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BHIWANI.

                                                                      Complaint No.:200 of 2016.

                                                                      Date of Institution: 09.09.2016.

                                                                      Date of Decision:05.12.2016

Jogender son of Sh. Surender, resident of House No. 1388, VPO Samand, Tehsil Meham, District Rohtak.

                                                                                ….Complainant.

                                        Versus

1. Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Ltd. Gurgaon through Branch Manager, 3^rd Floor JMD Regent Plaza, Sikandarpur, Gurgaon.

2. M/s Shri Ram Transport Finance Company Ltd., near Radha Swami Satsang Bhawan First Floor, Rohtak Road, Bhiwani.

                                                                 …...Opposite Parties. 

COMPLAINT U/S 12 & 13 OF CONSUMER PROECTION ACT.

BEFORE: -   Shri Rajesh Jindal, President

                   Mrs. Sudesh, Member

Present:- Shri Hanuman Parshad, Advocate for complainant.

ORDER:-

Rajesh Jindal, President:

                    The case of the complainant in brief, is that he is owner of a Maruti Car  bearing registration No. HR-16E-8448 and the same was insured from OP no. 1 vide policy no. OG-11-9995-1801-00002802 which was valid from 30.09.2010 to 29.09.2011. The complainant alleged that on 24.09.2011 above said vehicle was damaged in road accident and informed the OP no. 1 about the accident.  It is alleged that he submitted all the required documents but the claim of the complainant was rejected. The complainant further alleged that due to the act and conduct of the respondents, he had to suffer mental agony and physical harassment. Hence, it amounts to deficiency in service on the part of respondents and as such he had to file the present complaint.

2.                 Since the filing of the complaint, the counsel for the complainant did not appear for arguments on the stage of admission.  Now he appeared and we have heard the counsel for the complainant.  As per the pleadings of the complainant the vehicle of the complainant met with accident on 24.09.2011 but he has not mentioned the place of accident in the complaint.  During the course of arguments he submitted that the vehicle met with accident near Meham which falls in District Rohtak.  The complainant has claimed that total loss was caused to the vehicle.  The complainant has annexed only letter dated 27.07.2012 of the OP and no other document has been annexed by him with the complaint.  Now during the course of arguments he has produced the copy of policy.  As per the contention of the complainant the vehicle was insured with OP no. 1, who is having its office at Gurgaon.  From the pleadings of the complainant no part of  cause of action has arisen within the territorial jurisdiction of this District Forum.  Hence, the complaint of the complainant is dismissed for want of territorial jurisdiction without going into the merits of the case.  The complainant shall be at liberty to take legal recourse before the competent Court/Forum/Authority under the provisions of law, if so advised.   Certified copies of the order be sent to the parties free of costs.  File be consigned to the record room, after due compliance.

Announced in open Forum.

Dated: 05.12.2015.           

                                                                            (Rajesh Jindal)

                                                                                President,     

                                                                      District Consumer Disputes

                                                                      Redressal Forum, Bhiwani.

  (Sudesh)     

                       Member.