Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rohtak.
Complaint No. : 230.
Instituted on : 10.08.2019.
Decided on : 25.07.2022
Jai Bhagwan Saini son of Sh. Manphul Singh, r/o House No.1364/21, near Saini B.Ed. College, Chunni Pura, Rohtak Old resident of Ladout, Rohtak, Haryana-124001.
......................Complainant.
Vs.
- Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Ltd., policy issuing office at Flat no.201-201A, 2nd Floor, ITL Twine Tower, Netaji Subhash Place, Delhi, phone no.101142470810, through its branch Manager.
- Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. 1st floor, Dalal Complex, Neeraj Motors, Delhi Road, Rohtak. Policy no.OG-19-1136-1801-00000375.
...........…….Opposite parties.
COMPLAINT U/S 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986.
BEFORE: SH.NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT.
DR. TRIPTI PANNU, MEMBER.
DR. SHYAM LAL, MEMBER
Present: Sh.S.N.Kaushik, Advocate for the complainant.
Sh. Puneet Chahal, Advocate for the opposite party No.1.
Opposite party No.2 given up.
ORDER
NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT:
1. Brief facts of the case as per the complainant are that the complainant had got his Renault Duster RXF 85PS bearing registration no.HR-12W-6400 insured w,.e.f. 14.08.2018 to 13.08.2019 vide policy no.OG-19-1136-1801-00000375 from the opposite party for value of Rs.473500/-. The aforesaid car badly damaged in a motor vehicle accident on 25.01.2019 near D.Park Rohtak. The aforesaid vehicle suffered damages of Bonnet, Front grill, Bumper, Leg-grill Engine-support, Radiator, Condenser and other various parts. The vehicle in question was got repaired at Rakesh Motor Workshop at Rohtak and they charged Rs.2900/- for AC repair and also charged Rs.26000/- vide billno.208 dated 15/0-2.2019 and Rs.8500/- vide bill no.209 dated 15.02.2019. Complainant paid a sum of Rs.71660/- for the purchase of new parts and rs.37400/- for the repair and fitting os other damaged parts, thus he pent in all rs.109069/- but the opposite party only paid a sum of Rs.45150/- to the complainant through his bank account on 26.02.2019 vide RTGS. Complainant made repeated requests to the opposite party to make payment of all the expenses incurred by him for the repair and new parts of the damaged vehicle but the opposite party has not paid the balance amount of Rs.63915/- despite repeated requests of the complainant. The act and conduct of the opposite parties is illegal and amounts to deficiency in service. Hence this complaint and it is prayed that opposite parties may kindly be directed to pay a sum of Rs.63915/- alongwith interest, compensation and litigation expenses as explained in relief clause.
2. After registration of complaint, notice was issued to the opposite parties. Opposite parties in their reply has submitted that answering respondent had appointed an IRDA accredited surveyor to carry the survey of the spot and to assess the nature and amount of loss. On perusal of the survey report the total loss liability assessment was to the tune of Rs.45150/- The same was acceptable to the complainant and thus the same was duly paid to the complainant. Thus his complaint is also barred by principle of estoppels as the complainant with his free will had accepted full and final settlement of claim. All the other contents of the complaint were stated to be wrong and denied and opposite parties prayed for dismissal of complaint with cost.
4. Ld. Counsel for the complainant in his evidence has tendered affidavit Ex.CW1/A, documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C11 and has closed his evidence on dated 20.08.2021. Ld. counsel for the opposite party No.1 tendered affidavit Ex.RW1/A, documents Ex.R1 to Ex.R4 and closed his evidence on 25.11.2021.
5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through material aspects of the case very carefully.
6. We have minutely perused the documents placed on record. The main contention of the complainant is that he has spent an amount of Rs.109069/- on the repair of the vehicle. He spent an amount of Rs.71669/- on the purchase of new parts of vehicle and also paid an amount of Rs.37400/- on labour charges. The respondent insurance company only paid an amount of Rs.45150/- to the complainant. Through this complaint, the complainant demanded the remaining amount of Rs.63915/-. The respondent also placed on record the survey report as Ex.R2 and also annexed the detail of parts report and labour charges report as Ex.R3. As per Ex.R2 the vehicle has been repaired by a non tie up repair workshop. The vehicle has not been repaired by the authorized service station by the complainant so the detailed assessment has been made by the insurance company which has been placed on record as Ex.R3. The perusal of Ex.R3 itself shows that the complainant has purchased the parts of the vehicle amounting to Rs.62319/- and spent an amount of Rs.13750/- on account of labour charges. We have minutely perused the documents Ex.C3, Ex.C4 and Ex.C5. The perusal of these documents shows that the complainant has spent an amount of Rs.37400/- on account of labour charges on the repair of the vehicle but the insurance company assessed Rs.13750/- as labour charges. The surveyor has not mentioned any ground to reduce the alleged labour charges. Hence we came to the conclusion that the surveyor has assessed the less amount of labour charges without any authentic ground. Hence there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties. However, to prove the bills Ex.C3, Ex.C4 and Ex.C5 the complainant has not placed on record any affidavit of the repairer shop(authorized repair). Hence in our view complainant is entitled for an another lumpsum amount of Rs.12000/- on account of labour charges.
7. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case we hereby allow the complaint and direct the opposite parties to pay a lumpsum amounf of Rs.12000/-(Rupees twelve thousand only) on account of less payment against labour charges and also to pay Rs.4000/-(Rupees four thousand only) as compensation on account of deficiency in service and litigation expenses to the complainant within one month from the date of decision, failing which opposite parties shall be liable to pay interest @ 9% p.a. on Rs.12000/-(Rupees twelve thousand only) from the date of decision i.e. 25.07.2022 till its realization to the complainant.
8. 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:
25.07.2022.
........................................................
Nagender Singh Kadian, President
..........................................
Tripti Pannu, Member.
……………………………….
Shyam Lal, Member
