In the court of District Consumer Forum, Gaya

Consumer Complainant Case No. - 43 of 2015

Paramjit Kumar alias Paramjeet Kumar son of Nand Kishore Tiwari resident of village Bana, Police Station -Khijari Sarai, District -Gaya, Bihar ..... Complainant

                                       V/s
Chola Mandalam M/S GIC Limited through its manager Munna Jha, 3rd floor, 1 G, Complex West boring Canal Road, Patna ...... Opposite Party

Present:
 1. Shri Ramesh Chandra Singh..... President

 2. Syed Mohtashim Akhtar....Male Member

 3. Smt. Sunita Kumari ....Female Member

          Dated:- 21^th Sep of

                                                ORDER

                            1. The instant case has been filed by the Complainant Paramjit Kumar against the opposite party Chola Mandalam for breach of service and demanded repairing cost of his insured and damaged vehicle in accident ₹

                             2.In brief ,the Complaint's case is that he is owner of a truck having its registration number CG 07 CA/

Consumer Complainant Case No. - 43 of 2015

Road, near village Navgraha within the jurisdiction of Amas police station, District-Gaya. The information was given to the Complainant on mobile but he could not come on same day as he was out of station, so he came at PO on 25th October

                             3. On notice the opposite party appeared and filed his written statement stating there in that the Complaint petition is not maintainable

Consumer Complainant Case No. - 43 of 2015

either in eye of law or on the facts and the cause of action arose in the Complaint petition is entirely wrong. It is admitted that the Complainant obtained a policy from opposite party Chola Mandalam MS General Insurance Company Limited for the period of 29 March th February th October th October

Consumer Complainant Case No. - 43 of 2015

mental torturers to the Complainant in any way. The opposite party as repudiated the claim of the Complainant on the ground of delay information and misrepresentation of facts. All the bills and vouchers are made afterthought and are estimate which is not tax paid bills, so the Complainant cannot claim only on the basis of the estimate issued by anybody. There is no deficiency in the service on the part of the opposite party rather the opposite party with the actual loss of Complainant and there is no due against this opposite party, hence the Complainant is not entitled to get any claim amount.

                             4. The main question of determination before the Court is whether the Complainant has been able to prove his case and whether he is entitled to get relief as sought for.

                              5. In support of their respective cases both parties have filed year evidence is on affidavit and documents.

                               6. The Complainant has filed original voucher of expenses for repairing the damaged truck, copy of RC book, copy of insurance certificate, national permit and photo copy of driving license, certificate of fitness and copy of legal notice.

                             7. The opposite party has filed Xerox copy of Sanha number th October

Consumer Complainant Case No. - 43 of 2015                            

                            8. It is admitted fact that the alleged vehicle truck Registration No. C.G- CA / to for the period 29th March

Consumer Complainant Case No. - 43 of 2015

data about value of parts, the report will be arbitrary. He also referred decision of the Honorable Supreme Court in case of New India Assurance Company Limited versus Pradeep Kumar, SAR (CIVIL)

Hence, from the above-mentioned decisions of Honorable courts we are of the opinion that the Survey Report submitted by the opposite party is not admissible, because it has been not supported with affidavit by the Surveyor submitted the report. We are further of the opinion that the valid and genuine documents regarding the receipts of repairing the vehicles are admissible. In the instant case the Complainant has submitted tax invoice, Mishra Motors dated 22 December th April th October Hence, the opposite party is directed to pay ₹1,17,th October

                  Dictated and corrected

Female Member           Male Member                              President

Sunita Kumari                 Syed Mohtashim Akhtar          Ramesh Chandra Singh