Complainant Ajay Kumar has filed the instant complaint against the opposite parties under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 with a prayer that opposite parties be directed to pay the claim of Rs.1,40,000/- alongwith interest @ 18% per annum from the date of accident till its actual realization. Opposite parties be also burdened for Rs.40,000/- on account of harassment, mental agony and financial loss to him alongwith Rs.20,000/- as litigation expenses, in the interest of justice.

2.       The case of the complainant in brief is that he purchased a comprehensive policy for his Truck Trolla make TATA bearing Registration No.PB-06-L-2966, Model 2010 for Rs.14,00,000/- through Intermediary Name: IBL VFD PATHANKOT having Code No.201959909617 and paid the premium of Rs.34,165/-. Opposite party issued Motor Policy-cum-Certificate of Insurance bearing No.3379/00477471/000/03 having Cover Note No.3020401 and package type “Goods Carrying Vehicle”. This comprehensive policy was valid from 20.09.2013 to 19.09.2014 midnight. Hence he is consumer of the opposite party. The Truck Trolla met with an accident on 1.8.2014 at Chanderkot (J & K) and an FIR No.40/2014 dated 1.08.2014 U/S 279/337 of the RPC was registered with the Police Station Chanderkot and the original FIR was handed over to the spot surveyor appointed by the opposite party for the spot inspection. The license of the driver and National Permit of the above mentioned Truck Trolla was taken in possession by the Police of the Police Station Chanderkot and to this effect a certificate was issued by the Police Station Chanderkot.  He immediately informed the opposite party about this accident and they appointed the surveyor who conducted the spot inspection of the damaged vehicle and also took the photographs at the spot and he submitted all the documents required by the spot surveyor at the spot. As per the advice of the spot surveyor, he lifted his damaged Truck Trolla from the spot to Gurdaspur and got it repaired as per the directions of the surveyor.  He has further pleaded that he submitted all the documents again i.e. Estimates, documents with particulars of the above mentioned Truck Trolla and original Bills amounting to Rs.1,40,000/- to the final Surveyor namely Mr.Sony of the opposite party but the opposite party has not settled his claim and after waiting for 1.1/2 years, he served a notice to the opposite party through his counsel but of no avail. Thus there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. Hence this complaint.

3.        Upon notice, the opposite parties appeared and filed their written reply through their counsel by taking the preliminary objections that complainant has no cause of action to file the present complaint; there is no deficiency in services on the part of the insurance company. Actually complaint of the complainant is premature. The claim of the complainant has been closed after sending him many reminders and the demand of the documents have been made which are required for settlement of claim but no such document ever sent by the complainant. The claim has been closed due to no response and non-submission of documents vide letter dated 29.8.2014 and the complaint is not within limitation. On merits, it was submitted that the policy is subject to verification and the period of insurance is as per document. The complainant is not consumer of the opposite parties. It was further submitted that the complainant failed to provide relevant documents due to which his claim has been closed after reminders. The vehicle has been duly surveyed by the surveyor and as per his report the liability is of Rs.24,050/- and as per terms and conditions of the policy. All other averments made in the complaint have been denied and lastly the complaint has been prayed to be dismissed.

4.     Complainant tendered into evidence his own affidavit Ex.CW1/A and of Jarnail Singh Ex.CW2/A alongwith other documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C4 and closed the evidence. 

5.         Counsel for the opposite parties tendered into evidence affidavit of Sh.Ashutosh Manager Ex.OP-1, alongwith other documents Ex.OP-2 to Ex.OP-4 and closed the evidence.

6.             We have carefully examined all the documents/evidence produced on record and have also judiciously considered and perused the arguments duly put forth by the learned counsels along with the incidental scope of adverse inference for of some documents that have been somehow ignored to be produced by the contesting litigants. We observe that the prime dispute prompted at ‘non-settlement’ of the complainant’s Truck accident-insurance claim by the OP insurers alleging non-submission of the requisite documents. Further, we find that neither the complainant nor the insurers have produced acceptable and sufficiently cogent evidence to prove their inter-se allegations and its counters etc. The complainant besides his own affidavit Ex.Cw1/A has produced Ex.C2 Certificate dated 14.08.2014 (valid for 10 days) from the SHO PS Chanderkote regarding custodial possession of Driver’s DL & Vehicle’s National Permit besides Ex.Cw2/A affidavit of Truck Body Builder Jarnail Singh Charging Rs.80,000/- towards repair of the Truck Body of the accidented vehicle. No other evidence of Repair Bills for the total insurance-claim amount of Rs.1,40,000/- has been produced on records. On the other hand, the OP insurers have duly deposed vide its affidavit (written reply) that the impugned claim was closed on 29.08.2014 on account of non-submission of claim related documents but have not produced and document-requisition letters and not even the repudiation letter. However, Ex.OP2 Survey Report assessing the net loss insurer liability at Rs.24,050/- stands duly produced on the record proceedings along with the undated scantly filled-in insurance claim form Ex.OP3. Somehow, we find that the non-settlement of the impugned accident claim has resulted out of the ‘collective cum contributory’ callousness at the behest of both the sides.

7.       Under the circumstances, we are of the considered opinion that the present complaint shall be best disposed of by directing the opposite party insurers to pay Rs.24,050/- (the surveyor assessed amount vide Ex.OP2) with the present complainant agreeing (to accept) who shall otherwise be at liberty to submit all the requisite claim supporting documents to the insurers within 15 days of the receipt of the copy of these orders in order to enable the insurers to settle the claim afresh within the next 30 days of receipt of the same. In that eventuality, the parties here shall in their own maturity and mutual-interest, take expeditious measures to reach a judicious settlement.  

8.       Copy of the order be communicated to the parties free of charges. After compliance, file be consigned to records. 

                                                                           (Naveen Puri)

                                                                                President                                                                                          

ANNOUNCED:                                              (Jagdeep Kaur)

January 27, 2017                                                       Member                               

*MK*