Assam

Dibrugarh

CC/14/2022

MANJANG TANG SINGPHO - Complainant(s)

Versus

CHOLAMANDALAM MS GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. - Opp.Party(s)

TONMOY DUTTA

05 Feb 2024

ORDER

  Date of Argument – 10.03.2023

                                                                        Date of Judgment – 29.05.2023 

             This complaint was filed by the complainant under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 claiming to direct the opposite parties to pay to the complainant Rs.84,674/- being the cost of repairing of the damaged vehicle, Rs.21,500/- being the cost of carrying charge of the damaged vehicle, Rs.2,00,000/- being the loss of business suffered by the complainant and Rs.50,000/- as compensation for physical and mental harassment and for any other relief/reliefs entitled.

Judgement

            The case of the complainant is that the complainant is a resident of Bordumsa town, PO & PS Bordumsa of Changlang District, Arunachal Pradesh. The complainant purchased a Mahindra Tractor from the proforma O.P., i.e. Assam Auto Agency(Dibrugarh), situated at A.T. Road, near Gurudwara, PO & District Dibrugarh within the jurisdiction of this Commission on 06.01.2022 and the vehicle was registered before the DTO Namsai, Arunachal Pradesh with registration No.AR-20/8120. The vehicle was insured with the O.P. No.1(A), the Guwahati Branch of which is being run and managed by the O.P. No.1(A) at Dibrugarh for policy No.3315/00004640/000/05, dtd. 06/01/2022 being its validity till 05.01.2023. The said tractor met with an accident on 24.03.2023 at Bordumsa of Changlang District, Arunachal Pradesh and the vehicle has got badly damaged. After the accident the complainant lodged a complaint with the nearest police station at Bordumsa and the police issued a police verification report on  dtd. 28.03.2022 on the basis of their verification dtd.26.03.2022.

            The complainant brought his damaged vehicle to Assam Auto Agency (proforma O.P.), Dibrugarh by carrying the same by a truck on payment of Rs.21.500/-. The complainant got his vehicle repaired after 40(forty) days of the road accident and in that way he suffered a business loss of Rs.2,00,000/-.

            The proforma O.P., Assam Auto Agency issued a bill for Rs.84,674/- in the name of the complainant for repairing the damaged vehicle.

            The complainant submitted a copy of that bill to the officials concerned of the O.P. No.1 with a hope that they will settle the insurance claim at the earliest but surprisingly the complainant received a message from an official of the O.P. No.1 on 22.06.2022 under reference DO/Liability Letter through which they intimated that the claim had been approved for Rs.24,442.66 only against the repairing bill submitted by the proforma O.P., the authorized service dealer of his vehicle for Rs.84,674/-.

            The complainant, thereafter, sent legal notice as well as reminder legal notice to the O.P.s demanding therein to satisfy the insurance claim but despite receiving notices, the O.P.s failed to comply with the demands made therein. The complainant had paid Rs.84,674/- only for repairing and replacement of parts of the damaged vehicle but O.P. No.1 had declined to satisfy the genuine claim. The complainant claims that the O.P.s and their agents and employees have avoided willfully the settlement of the insurance claim and willful negligency on their part has caused huge monetary loss to the complainant besides mental agony and physical harassment.

            Having no alternative the complainant has filed this complaint petition before this Commission seeking the following reliefs :

1. Rs.84,674/- being the cost of repairing of the damaged vehicle.
2. Rs.21,500/- being the cost of carrying charge of the damaged vehicle
3. Rs.2,00,000/- being the loss of business suffered by the complainant and
4. Rs.50,000/- as compensation for physical and mental harassment.

            After registering the case notices were issued to the opposite parties but the opposite parties, after receiving notices did not appear before the Commission and no W/S has been filed on their behalf for which the Commission was pleased to pass ex-parte order dtd. 03.11.22.

            In this case from the complainant’s side evidence of complainant Shri Manjang Tang Singpho has adduced in the form of affidavit. In his evidence on affidavit the complaint has stated that he purchased a vehicle,viz. Mahindra Tractor from the Proforma O.P. on 06.01.2022 and the said vehicle was lateron registered before the DTO, Namsai, Arunachal Pradesh with registration No.AR-20/8120. Ext. No.1 is Registration Certificate. The vehicle was insured with the O.P. No.1(A), the Guwahati Branch of which is being run and managed by the O.P. No.1(A) at Dibrugarh for policy No.3315/00004640/000/05, dtd. 06/01/2022 being its validity till 05.01.2023. Ext. No.2 is the insurance policy certificate. The said tractor met with an accident on 24.03.2023 at Bordumsa of Changlang District, Arunachal Pradesh and the vehicle has got badly damaged. After the accident the complainant lodged a complaint with the nearest police station at Bordumsa and the police issued a police verification report on  dtd. 28.03.2022 on the basis of their verification dtd.26.03.2022. Ext. No.3 is the police verification report. The complainant brought his damaged vehicle to Assam Auto Agency (proforma O.P.), Dibrugarh by carrying the same by a truck on payment of Rs.21.500/-. The complainant got his vehicle repaired after 40(forty) days of the road accident and in that way he suffered a business loss of Rs.2,00,000/-.

            The proforma O.P., Assam Auto Agency issued a bill for Rs.84,674/- in the name of the complainant for repairing the damaged vehicle. Ext. No.4 is the bill issued by the Proforma Opposite Party.

            The complainant submitted a copy of that bill to the officials concerned of the O.P. No.1 with a hope that they will settle the insurance claim at the earliest but surprisingly the complainant received a message from an official of the O.P. No.1 on 22.06.2022 under reference DO/Liability Letter through which they intimated that the claim had been approved for Rs.24,442.66 only against the repairing bill submitted by the proforma O.P., the authorized service dealer of his vehicle for Rs.84,674/-. Ext. No.5 is approval letter.

            The complainant, thereafter, sent legal notice as well as reminder legal notice to the O.P.s demanding therein to satisfy the insurance claim but despite receiving notices, the O.P.s failed to comply with the demands made therein. Ext. No. 6,7,8 and 9 respectively are the legal notice, reminder legal notice and postal registration receipts. The complainant had paid Rs.84,674/- only for repairing and replacement of parts of the damaged vehicle but O.P. No.1 had declined to satisfy the genuine claim. The complainant claims that the O.P.s and their agents and employees have avoided willfully the settlement of the insurance claim and willful negligency on their part has caused huge monetary loss to the complainant besides mental agony and physical harassment. The complainant claims that he is entitled to get the reliefs as prayed for in his complaint petition.

            The complainant submitted written argument in length on 27.01.2023. Perused the written argument submitted by the conducting advocate for the complainant.

Points to be Decided

1. Whether the complainant is a consumer under the opposite parties.
2. Whether the opposite parties are liable for deficient and negligent services towards the complainant.
3. Whether the settlement amount offered by the opposite party was just and proper.
4. Whether the complainant is entitled to get the reliefs claimed by him in his complaint petition.

 

Points Decided

 

1. It is held that the complainant is a consumer of the opposite parties under the purview of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

 

2. On going through the complaint petition filed by the complainant and after careful perusal of his evidence on affidavit along with exhibits and written argument it is seen that the opposite parties are liable for deficient and negligent service towards the complainant.

 

3. On going through the evidence and written argument of the complainant it is found that the complainant immediately after the accident of the vehicle lodged FIR before the Bordumsa Police Station of Changlang District, Arunachal Pradesh and accordingly police investigated the matter and submitted report on 28.03.2022. Ext. No.3 is the police verification report wherefrom the accident was proved. The complainant incurred Rs.21,500/- for carrying the damaged vehicle to the Assam Auto Agency, Dibrugarh (Proforma O.P. in this case). The proforma O.P., Assam Auto Agency issued a bill for Rs.84,674/- in the name of the complainant for repairing the damaged vehicle. Ext. No.4 is the bill issued by the proforma O.P. The complainant submitted the said bill along with his claim before the O.P. No.1 with the hope of settling the claim soon but vide their letter dtd.22.06.2022 Of O.P. No.1 they intimated the complainant that the claim has been approved for Rs.24,442.66 only. Being aggrieved the complainant sent notice through advocate to the O.P. demanding settlement of his claim as per the bill of the authorized service dealer of that vehicle but the O.P. did not comply with the legal notice as well as reminder notice. It is seen that the opposite party settled the claim at Rs.24,442.66 instead of the actual cost of repairing, i.e. Rs.84,674/- as claimed by the complainant. In their letter dtd. 22.06.2022 the O.P. did not mention the basis of settlement of the claim of the complainant at Rs.24.442.66. Such act on the part of the O.P. No.1 warrants deficiency in their services and also negligency towards their customer and from this observation we may come into conclusion that the amount settled by the O.P. cannot be regarded as just and proper.

 

4. After meticulous scrutiny of complaint petition, evidence on affidavit and exhibits and  written argument of the complainant we found that the complainant is entitled to get the reliefs  as specifically mentioned in our sentence below.

          From all above discussions and observations the Commission comes to the conclusion that the complainant is entitled to get the relief and the Commission directs the Opposite Party, Viz Chalamandalam M.S. General Insurance Co. Ltd., Dibrugarh Branch –

1. To pay to the complainant the sum of Rs.84,674/-being the cost of repairing the damaged vehicle with 7% interest p.a. from the date of filing the case till payment of the amount.
2. To pay Rs. 21,500/- being the cost of carrying the damaged vehicle to the authorized service centre.
3. To pay Rs.25,000/- for causing physical harassment and mental agony to the complainant including cost of the litigation.

         All the above mentioned amounts be deposited into the credit of this Commission by the O.P. within 30(thirty) days from the date of receipt of this judgement and order.

      Send copy of this judgement and order to the O.P. for compliance.

      The instant C.C. No.14/22 is accordingly disposed of ex parte.

            Next date fixed 15.06.2023 for compliance.