DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

WEST TRIPURA :  AGARTALA

 

 

CASE   NO:   CC- 05 of 2023

 

Sri Dipanjan Das,

S/O- Chandan Das,

Assam Agartala Road,

Near Bijay Sangha Club,

P.O. Khayerpur, 

P.S. Bodhjungnagar,

District- West Tripura- 799008. …...............Complainant.

 

-VERSUS-

 

1. The Branch Manager,

Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd.,

3rd Floor, 602/N and   602/J,

Ker Choumuhani,

P.O. Ramnagar, 

P.S.West Agartala,

Pin- 799002.

 

2. The General Manager,

M/S Panna Motors,

Kashipur,

P.O. Resham Bagan,

P.S. Bodhjungnagar,

District- West Tripura- 799008.

 

3. The Manager, 

S. Dass and Sons,

3MCARE,

Madhya Kashipur,

Assam Agartala Road,

P.O. Resham Bagan,

P.S. East Agartala,

Agartala- 799008. …..................Opposite Parties.

 

 

 

 

 

 

  __________PRESENT__________

 

 SRI GOUTAM DEBNATH

PRESIDENT,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER  

DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

      WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA. 

 

DR (SMT) BINDU PAL

MEMBER,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER

DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

  WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA.

 

SRI SAMIR GUPTA

MEMBER,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER  DISPUTES  

REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA. 

 

 

C O U N S E L

 

 

For the O.P. No.1 : Ex-party.

 

For the O.P. No.3 : Ex-party.

 

 

 

 

F I N A L    O R D E R

1. This case is filed U/S 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 by Sri Dipanjan Das of Khayerpur (here-in-after called as “the Complainant”) against the O.Ps namely (1)The Branch Manager, Reliance Insurance Co. Ltd., Ker Choumuhani, Agartala(here-in-after called as “the O.P. No.1”), (2)The General Manager, M/S Panna Motors, Kashipur(here-in-after called as “the O.P.No.2”), (3)The Manager, S. Das and Sons, Agartala(here-in-after called as “the O.P. No.3”) alleging deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps.

1.1 The complainant purchased a Hyundai vehicle from O.P. No.2 which was insured with the O.P. No.1 for the period 05.05.2022 to 05.05.2023.

1.2 On 05.10.2022 at 2 P.M. the vehicle met with an accident at Khayerpur, Agartala. The vehicle was shifted to the garage of O.P. No.2 and the engineers submitted an estimate of Rs.3,03,541.52/- for repairing of the damaged vehicle. The estimate was communicated to the O.P. No.1 for payment. The O.P. No.2 verbally informed the complainant that unless the vehicle is removed from  the garage in time the complainant shall have to pay Rs.500/- per day as parking charge. As such the complainant removed the vehicle to the garage of O.P. No.3. Now the O.P. No.3 submitted an estimate of Rs.1,52,587/- with GST @ 18% which also the O.P. No.1 dishonoured for no reason. Hence this complaint claiming Rs.2,97,587/- in total.

 

2. The O.P. No.2 prayed for striking out the name of O.P. No.2 and the name of the O.P. No.2 was struck out vide order dated 27.03.2023. However, the case has been proceeding exparty against the O.P. No.1 and 3. 

3. The complainant submitted evidence on affidavit and submitted copy of Policy of Insurance of the vehicle from where it appears that the vehicle was duly insured with the O.P. No.1 covering the date of accident. The complainant has submitted driving license of the complainant covering the date of accident. The complainant has submitted estimate of O.P. No.3 from where it appears that the O.P. No.3 submitted estimate for a sum of Rs.1,52,587/- for repairing the damage of the vehicle.

4. Hearing argument the following point is taken up for discussion and decision:-

 

5. It is a fact that the complainant has not submitted any police document to show the fact of accident but it is not the case of the complainant that the accident occurred due to the fault of any other person. On the other hand, the complainant has submitted estimate issued from the O.P. No.3 for repairing of the vehicle. The O.P. No.1 Insurance Company has not appeared inspite of receiving summon from the Commission. As such in law the O.P. No.1 has admitted the claim of the complainant. As such, we have no hesitation in coming to the conclusion that the O.P. No.1 has defense to make out. However, we are not inclined to award any further compensation, litigation cost, which the complainant has claimed. 

6. The point is decided accordingly.

 

7 In the result, it is ordered that the O.P. No.1 being the insurer of the vehicle shall pay Rs.1,52,587/- to the complainant as award for repairing of the damage of the vehicle. This amount shall carry interest @ 7.5% P.A. from today unless paid within 30(thirty) days from today.

8. The case stands disposed off. Supply copy of this Final Order free of cost to the complainant. The complainant shall send a copy of the award to the O.P. No.1 at his own initiative.

 

 Announced.

 

 

 

SRI  GOUTAM DEBNATH

PRESIDENT,

DISTRICT CONSUMER  DISPUTES

REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

WEST TRIPURA: AGARTALA

 

 

 

 

DR (SMT)  BINDU  PAL

MEMBER,

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

WEST TRIPURA: AGARTALA

 

 

 

SRI SAMIR  GUPTA

MEMBER,

 DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES  

REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

WEST TRIPURA: AGARTALA.