DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SANGRUR.
Complaint No. 434
Instituted on: 01.09.2017
Decided on: 09.05.2018
Abhishek Jain S/o Sunil Jain resident of Ward No.1, C/O Arihant Traders, Opposite Stadium Moonak, Tehsil Moonak, District Sangrur.
…Complainant
Versus
1. Bharti Airtel Limited, 1, Nelson Mandela Road, Phase 2, New Delhi-110070 through its Chairman.
2. Apple India Pvt. Ltd. 9th Floor, Concorde tower ‘C’ UB City No.24, Vittal Mallya Road, Bangalore-560001 State Karnataka through its MD.
3. One Assist Consumer Solutions, Office at 707-709, Acma Plaza, Andheri, Kurla Road, Mumbai 400059 through its Managing Director/General Manager.
..Opposite parties
For the complainant : Shri Tarun Goyal, Adv.
For OP No.1 : Shri Gagandeep Bhagria, Adv.
For OP No.2 : Shri Sandip Kumar Goyal, Adv.
For OP NO.3. : Shri Saurav Garg, Adv.
Quorum: Sukhpal Singh Gill, President
Sarita Garg, Member
Vinod Kumar Gulati, Member
Order by : Sukhpal Singh Gill, President.
1. Shri Abhishek Jain, complainant (referred to as complainant in short) has preferred the present complaint against the opposite parties (referred to as OPs in short) on the ground that the complainant purchase one Apple iphone 6S-16 GB Rose Gold having IMEI number 353312072502489 on 26.5.2016 and the said mobile was under warranty for one year. Thereafter the complainant availed the services of the OP number 1 by getting insured the mobile in question on 23.6.2017 by paying a sum of Rs.80/-, which was deducted from his mobile number 9878836182. Further case of the complainant is that thereafter the OP number 1 sent an acknowledgement mail to the complainant under which they issued a membership ID 1001576825, where the mobile in question was insured for Rs.40,000/- from the period from 23.6.2017 to 22.6.2018.
2. Further case of the complainant is that on 1.7.2017, the mobile in question fell down from his pocket and screen of the mobile got broken, as such the complainant intimated the OP number 1 about the damage of the mobile as well as on toll free number and also sent the image of the broken mobile, ID proof, bill and short summary. Further case of the complainant is that thereafter he received an email on 4.7.2017, whereby it was intimated that the claim case of the complainant was closed without assigning any reason. Thus, alleging deficiency in service on the part of the OPs, the complainant has prayed that the OPs be directed to pay to the complainant the claim amount of Rs.40,000/- along with interest @ 18% per annum or in the alternative to replace the mobile in question with a new one and further to pay compensation and litigation expenses.
3. In reply filed by OP number 1, preliminary objections are taken up on the grounds that this Forum has no jurisdiction to try and decide the present complaint, that the complainant has not approached this Forum with clean hands. On merits, it is stated that the insurance is provided by One Assist Consumer Solutions and the OP number 1 is not in the business of providing insurance. It is stated further that One Assist is obliged to assume control of the defence or the settlement of the claim and OP number 1 will reasonably cooperate with the said for such defence. The other allegations levelled in the complaint have been denied in toto.
4. In reply filed by OP number 2, preliminary objections are taken up on the grounds that the complaint is not maintainable and that the complaint has been filed with malafide intention. On merits, it is stated that the warranty of the mobile has already elapsed and the iphone was accidentally damaged by the complainant by dropping it. Since the mobile in question is out of warranty, the OP number 2 has nothing to do in the matter. Lastly, prayed for dismissal of the complaint with special costs.
5. OP number 3 has filed affidavit on behalf of OP number 3and not separate reply has been filed.
6. The learned counsel for the complainant has produced Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-5 affidavit and copies of documents and closed evidence. On the other hand, the learned counsel for OP number 1 has produced Ex.P1/1 affidavit and closed evidence. The leaned counsel for OP number 2 has produced ExOP2/1 affidavit along with annexure R-1 and R-2 and closed evidence. The learned counsel for OP number 3 has produced Ex.OP3/1 affidavit and closed evidence.
7. We have carefully perused the complaint, version of the opposite parties, evidence produced on the file and also heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties. In our opinion, the complaint merits acceptance, for these reasons.
8. It is an admitted fact that the complainant purchased the insurance policy of OP number 1 i.e. Airtel Secure for getting his apple iphone in question insured for Rs.40,000/- and the premium was payable on monthly basis i.e. Rs.80/- per month. It is also an admitted case between the complainant and OP number 1 that the mobile set in question damaged during the subsistence of the insurance policy on 1.7.2017 and the screen of the mobile set was damaged and intimation of which was given to the OP number 1, but the grievance of the complainant is that the OP number 1 closed the claim saying that the claim is not payable without assigning any reason, as is evident from the copy of letter Ex.C-5. But, we failed to understand why the OP number 1 did not pay the claim of the complainant as the screen of the mobile set in question got broken during the subsistence of the insurance period on 1.7.2017 and the mobile set in question is of no use without the screen. Further we may mention that since the mobile in question was insured one and non settling of the claim is itself deficiency in service on the part of the OP number 1.
9. In view of our above discussion, we allow the complaint and direct OP number 1 to pay to the complainant an amount of Rs,40,000/- being the cost of the insured mobile set, however, subject to returning of the damaged mobile set to OP number 1. We further direct OP number 1 to pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.5000/- in lieu of litigation expenses. This order of ours be complied with within a period of thirty days of its communication. A copy of this order be issued to the parties free of cost. File be consigned to records.
Pronounced.
May 9, 2018.
(Sukhpal Singh Gill)
President
(Sarita Garg)
Member
(Vinod Kumar Gulati)
Member
