Charanjit Singh, President;
1 The present complaint has been received from the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Amritsar by the order of the Hon’ble State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Punjab, Chandigarh for its disposal.
2 The complainant has filed the present complaint by invoking the provisions of Consumer Protection Act under Section 12, 13 against the opposite parties on the allegations that the complainant purchased one car make Telco LPK 2518 Tipper HGV from Pasco Motors District Roop Nagar and got its insured from the opposite party at Indusind Bank, Branch Office, Mall Road, Amritsar as per policy motor Schedule cum Certificate of Insurance having policy No. 3379/01476793/000/00 and got fully insured the same with the opposite party No. 1 vide aforesaid policy number having insured declared value of Rs. 26,36,250/- and while insuring the vehicle the complainant paid total sum of Rs. 55,642/- to the opposite party. The opposite party only supplied cover note to the complainant and except cover note no other document was ever supplied to the complainant. The complainant is a consumer of the opposite party. Unfortunately on 3.7.2017 the said vehicle of the complainant met with road accident with Divider when the driver of complainant namely Ranjit Singh was driving vehicle near India Gate, Chheharta, Amritsar and the complainant immediately informed about this accident to the opposite party. At that time surveyor examined the vehicle in question and at that time the surveyor demanded policy copy, DO Letter/ Liability Confirmation Mail, Chassis Number Photos, Bills of Repair etc. which were duly supplied to the opposite party. But subsequently, the opposite party kept mum and did not get the vehicle repaired and started delaying the matter on one pretext or the other, the vehicle being only source of livelihood cannot be parked/ stopped and as such, in order to earn livelihood the complainant got it repaired from his own pocket to the tune of Rs. 42,837/- to one Arora Auto and Lubricants store, 22-SCF Transport nagar, Amritsar as per invoice No. 365 dated 14.8.2017. Since the said vehicle was fully insured and it was the duty of opposite party to get the vehicle repaired immediately. Subsequently, the opposite party started demanding Vehicle Axle Alignment report which was never demanded earlier by the surveyor at the time of preparing survey report. The complainant of its own got the vehicle repaired, the opposite party in order to escape from its liability started demanding Vehicle Axle Alignment Report. The complainant did not get the same as the said report was never demanded by opposite party and the complainant got the vehicle repaired under bonafide belief that he may be given insured covered amount i.e. amount incurred towards repair of the vehicle. The complainant has already submitted all the documents with the opposite parties as per their demands but till date the opposite party did not bother to give even response and remained adamant on their aforesaid acts. The opposite party is legally bound to make the payment of the claim to the complainant and there is no bar to his claim in this regard as the vehicle in question was fully insured. The complainant has prayed that the following reliefs may be awarded in favour of complainant.
(i) To direct the opposite party to make payment of the amount so incurred by the complainant towards repair of the vehicle along with interest from the date of entitlement till its realization @12% per annum as the principal amount has been wrongly and illegally with held by the opposite party.
(ii) To direct the opposite parties to pay Rs. 40,000/- towards compensation for causing mental harassment, agony etc. to the complainants.
(iii) To direct the opposite party to pay a sum of Rs. 11,000/- towards litigation expenses.
3 After formal admission of the complaint, notice was issued to Opposite Parties and opposite parties appeared through counsel and filed written version and contested the complaint by interailia pleadings that the instant complaint is false, malicious, incorrect and malafide and nothing but an abuse of the process of law and it is an attempt to waste the precious time of this commission as the same has been filed by the complainant just to avail undue advantage. The complainant has not come to this commission with clean hands and has suppressed the material facts from this commission. The opposite parties had sent 3 reminder letters to the complainant for production of vehicle with alignment report of axle and also to produce the vehicle for final survey but the complainant did not do so, hence, the claim was closed for non submission of documents. There is no lawful cause of action arose in favour of the compliant to file the present complaint against the opposite party. The opposite parties have denied the other contents of the complaint and prayed for dismissal of the same.
4 To prove his case, the complainant tendered in evidence his affidavit Ex. C-1, photographs Ex. C-2, C-3, copy of policy schedule Ex. C-4, coy of the carriage permit Ex. C-5, copy of the RC Ex. C-5, copy of the letter dated 31.7.2017 Ex. C-7, copy of the adhar Card Ex. C-8, copy of the RC Ex. C-9, copy of the tax invoice Ex. C-10 and closed the evidence. Ld. counsel for the opposite parties placed on record affidavit of Satyabratta Das Ex. OP1, 2/A, Three reminder letters dated 31.7.2017, 8.8.2017, 16.8.2017 Ex. OP-1, motor final survey report Ex. OP-2, Motor Insurance Claim form Ex. OP-3.
5 We have heard the Ld. counsels for the parties and have carefully gone through the record and
6 In the present complainant, the complainant purchased one car make Telco LPK 2518 Tipper HFV from Pasco Motors Distt. Roop Nagar, and got it’s insured from the OP at IndusindBank, Branch Office Mall Road , (being intermediary). Bearing policy No.3379/01476793/000/00 and got fully insured the same with the OP No 1 and the complainant paid total sum of Rs. 55,642/- to the OP (Ex C-4)· On dated 3.7.2017 the said vehicle of the complainant met with road accident with divider when the driver of complainant namely Ranjit Singh was driving vehicle near India Gate , chheharta, Amritsar. When Surveyor examined the vehicle and at that time the surveyor demanded policy copy , D.O letter , Chassis number photos , bill of repair etc. which were duly supplied to the OP but the OP kept mum and did not get the vehicle repaired and started delaying the matter on one pretext or the other. As the vehicle being the only source of livelihood cannot be parked /stopped and in order to earn livelihood the complainant got it repaired from his own pocket from Arora Auto and Lubricants Store bearing invoice No. 365 dated 14/08/2017 paid 42,837/- (Ex.C.10). Later OP started demanding ‘VehicleAxle Alignment Report’ which was never demanded earlier by the Surveyor at the time of preparing the survey report. The complainant did not get the same as the said report was never demanded by OP and the complainant got the vehicle repaired under bonafide belief that he may be given insured covered amount. O.P stated in their written version that the OP had sent reminder letters to the complainant for production of a vehicle with alignment report of Axle but the complainant did not do so hence the claim was closed for non submission of documents.( Ex. OP-1,2/1 , OP-1,2/2 ,OP-1,2/3). In view of the above discussion we are of the considered view that the OP did not deny the fact that said vehicle met an accident on dated 03.07.20171. Further in Survey report they admitted the facts that :-
1. Vehicle met with an accident.
2. Vehicle driver name = Ranjeetsingh .
3. Accident particular – IKV was moving to avoid hit the TPV IV the divider (footpath) ( as narrated in claim form).
4. Repairs carried out as per approval -yes.
5. Parts replaced as per approval -yes.
It is pertinent to mention here that , OP failed to provide the affidavit of the surveyor (Vishal Dogra). In the absence of which no evidentiary value can be made on the report submitted by the surveyor. Reliance in this connection has been placed upon Manikant Vs. New India Assurance Co.Ltd. 1(2012) CPJ 88 (NC) of the Hon’ble National Commission wherein it has been held that the surveyor did not appear in court and subject himself to cross examination nor was any affidavit filed by him to prove his report . Producing a document in court does not by itself constitute proving the document. It has to be backed by credible evidence. In the instant case, no evidence was led to prove the surveyor’s report in the absence of which the surveyor’s report has little evidentiary value. Therefore, the Motor Final Survey Report (Ex.OP-1,2/4) cannot be accepted. Further neither the report nor the reply to the complaint discloses as to on what basis the surveyor had estimated labour charges and net liability of the insurer. Therefore the assessment made by him become wholly arbitrary and cannot be accepted. The next question, which arises for our consideration is as to how much the amount, the insurer should pay to the complainant . As the complainant in order to earn livelihood got the vehicle repaired from his own pocket from Arora Auto and Lubricants Store , invoice No. 365 dated 14.08.2017 paid Rs.42,837/- . As the OP did not deny the fact regarding road accidents and as per (Ex. C-10) the complainant paid the amount of Rs 42,837/- for the repair of the vehicle . Therefore, we are of the considered view that the complainant is liable to get the full amount paid by him on the repair of his vehicle as it is insured by the OP . The OP in order to escape from its liability started demanding further documents on dated 31.07.2017 after almost a month. Moreover, the opposite party instead of asking the alignment report of the axle should have asked the vehicle for the final survey. From the scrutiny of documents it has become crystal clear that the vehicle in question was met with an accident and the complainant has got the vehicle repaired himself. The surveyor has examined the vehicle and only account of non submission of vehicle alignment report the opposite party cannot deny the genuine claim.
7 Moreover, it is usual with the insurance company to show all types of green pastures to the customer at the time of selling insurance policies, and when it comes to payment of the insurance claim, they invent all sort of excuses to deny the claim. In the facts of this case, ratio of the decision of Hon‟ble Apex Court in case of Dharmendra Goel Vs. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., III (2008) CPJ 63 (SC) is fully attracted, wherein it was held that, Insurance Company being in a dominant position, often acts in an unreasonable manner and after having accepted the value of a particular insured goods, disowns that very figure on one pretext or the other, when they are called upon to pay compensation. This, take it or leave it‟, attitude is clearly unwarranted not only as being bad in law, but ethically indefensible. It is generally seen that the insurance companies are only interested in earning the premiums and find ways and means to decline claims. In similar set of facts the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in case titled as New India Assurance Company Limited Vs. Smt.Usha Yadav & Others 2008(3) RCR (Civil) Page 111 went on to hold as under:-
“It seams that the insurance companies are only interested in earning the premiums and find ways and means to decline claims. All conditions which generally are hidden, need to be simplified so that these are easily understood by a person at the time of buying any policy. The Insurance Companies in such cases rely upon clauses of the agreement, which a person is generally made to sign on dotted lines at the time of obtaining policy. Insurance Company also directed to pay costs of Rs.5,000/- for luxury litigation, being rich.
8 In view of the above discussion, the present complaint is allowed and the opposite parties is directed to make the payment of amount so incurred by the complainant. further the opposite parties can inspect/ examine the vehicle for final survey instead of asking the complainant to produce the alignment report of Axle to their satisfaction. The complainant has also been harassed by the opposite parties for a long time, as such the complainant is also entitled to Rs. 5,000/- ( Rs. Five Thousand only) as compensation on account of harassment and mental agony and Rs 3,500/- three Thousand Five Hundred only) as litigation expenses. Opposite Parties are directed to comply with the order within one month from the date of receipt of copy of the order, failing which the complainant is entitled to interest @ 9% per annum, on the awarded amount, from the date of accident till its realisation. Copy of order be supplied by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Amritsar as per rules. File be sent back to the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Amritsar.
Announced in Open Commission
15.09.2022
