DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BATHINDA (PUNJAB)
CC No. 256 of 10-06-2010 Decided on : 08-12-2010
Raj Medicos, Power House Road, (100 ft Road), Tehsil and District Bathinda through its Prop. Raj Kumar. .... Complainant Versus
The Branch Manager, Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd., 3038/A, 2nd Floor, Guru Kashi Marg, Near HDFC Bank, Bathinda. Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd., Ist Floor, SCO 329, Sector 9, Panchkula 134109.
..... Opposite parties
Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
QUORUM Ms. Vikramjit Kaur Soni, President Dr. Phulinder Preet, Member Sh. Amarjeet Paul, Member
For the Complainant : Sh. Rajesh Duggal, , counsel for the complainant For the Opposite parties : Sh. Sanjay Goyal, counsel for the opposite parties.
O R D E R
VIKRAMJIT KAUR SONI, PRESIDENT
The complainant has filed this complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (Here-in-after referred to as 'Act). The complainant got Insured his motorcycle bearing registration No. PB-03N-9212 vide Policy No. OG-10-1212-1802-00002324 dated 2.10.2009 with the opposite parties. The said vehicle met with an accident on 13-11-2009 and the complainant filed claim of Rs. 8869/- with the opposite parties. The opposite parties assessed the claim to the tune of Rs. 3929/-. The complainant alleged that the opposite parties have not supplied the details of deductions made by them for the claimed amount. The complainant sent a registered notice dated 7-4-2010 to the opposite parties but they have not replied to the same. Hence, this complaint. The opposite parties filed their written reply and took many legal objections. On merits, the opposite parties have pleaded that on receiving intimation of damage to the said motorcycle from the complainant, they deputed an independent surveyor to assess the loss, who assessed the loss to the tune of Rs. 3929.92 and accordingly, an amount of Rs. 3929/- was offered to the complainant. The complainant had refused to sign the discharge voucher and the amount was not released to him. The claim of the complainant was duly processed as per set norms and the amount assessed by the surveyor was duly offered but the same was not accepted by the complainant. The parties have led evidence in support of their respective pleadings. We have heard the arguments at length and have gone through the record and perused written submissions submitted by the parties. The complainant got his motorcycle bearing registration No. PB-03-N/9212 insured with the opposite parties on 2-10-2009. The said vehicle met with an accident and the complainant lodged claim of 8869/- with the opposite parties but the opposite parties have not paid him the full claim and assessed the loss to the tune of Rs. 3928.92. The opposite parties offered the assessed amount to the complainant but the complainant refused to sign the discharge voucher and the amount was not released to him. The complainant had submitted that he spent Rs. 8869/- on the repair of the said vehicle. The opposite parties wrote a letter dated 17-11-2009 to the complainant intimating him that the assessed amount of his claim was Rs. 3929/- and asked him to provide Claim Discharge Cum Satisfaction voucher duly signed by the insured. In response to this letter, the complainant wrote a letter Ex. C-5 to the opposite parties whereby he asked the opposite parties to furnish the details that why an amount approximately of Rs.5,000/- has been deducted from his claim amount of Rs. 8900/- and he showed his inability to sign the claim discharge cum satisfaction voucher. The opposite parties instead of furnishing the details of deductions to the complainant, as required by him, wrote him a letter dated 18-1-2010 that the claim file of the complainant was closed on dated 9-12-2009 due to non-co-operation of the complainant. Thereafter, the complainant got issued legal notice and in reply to legal notice on 17-05-2010, the opposite parties have stated that :- “.....that the deductions are on account of damage to silencer not being payable as the silencer was in rusted condition and damage to silencer did not co-relate with the cause of loss. The damage to silencer was on account of ordinary wear and tear and loss for damages arising out of wear and tear are excluded under the policy terms and conditions already supplied to your client. .... Other deductions are on account of depreciation, salvage and excess clause in accordance with All India Motor Tariff and the policy terms and conditions.” A perusal of Survey report Ex. R-2 reveals that at page 2, the surveyor Gurpreet Singh Brar has mentioned under the heading “Surveyor Comments – loss is checked and found accidental by nature and also according to the customer statement, but only the silencer is not payable as it was broken because of rust. Silencer become very weak because of rust and the small impact broken the silencer.” Thus, the surveyor has mentioned in his report that loss was found accidental by nature and small impact has broken the silencer. This impact was due to the accident of the vehicle and in such circumstances, the opposite parties cannot deny the claim of silencer considering it as wear and tear. Hence, the cost of silencer i.e. Rs 3018/- is payable after deduction of depreciation @ 25% as per All India Motor Tariff, in addition to the assessed amount of Rs. 3929/- as assessed by the surveyor. The complainant is entitled to the payment of loss amount to the tune of ( Rs. 3929/- as assessed by the surveyor plus cost of silencer Rs. 2263/- (3018/-minus Rs. 755/- as 25% depreciation) = Total Rs. 6192/- In the result, this complaint is accepted with Rs. 2000/- as compensation and cost. The opposite parties are directed to pay to the complainant an amount 6192/- being the amount of loss suffered by him due to accident of the vehicle in question, in addition to Rs. 2,000/- as compensation for mental harassment and litigation expenses.
The compliance of this order be made by the opposite parties jointly and severally, within 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. A copy of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of cost and the file be consigned to record.
Pronounced 08-12-2010 (Vikramjit Kaur Soni) President
(Dr. Phulinder Preet) Member (Amarjeet Paul) Member
|
