Orissa

Cuttak

CC/175/2016

Sarojini Behera - Complainant(s)

Versus

Divisional Manager,New India Assurance Co Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

P K Routray

27 Nov 2018

ORDER

IN THE COURT OF THE DIST. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,CUTTACK.

                                                                                    C.C No.175/2016

Sarojini Behera,

Plot No.F-832,Sector-6,C.D.A,

Markat Nagar,Cuttack.                                                               … Complainant.

 

                Vrs.

 

1.        Divisional Manager,

New India Assurance Co. Ltd.,

At/PO:Mangalabag,Dist:Cuttack.

 

2.        Branch Manager,

New India Assurance Co. Ltd.,

At:LKapileswar,PO:Choudwar,

Dist:Cuttack.                                                                                … Opp. Parties.

 

 

Present:               Sri Dhruba Charan Barik,LL.B. President.

Smt. Sarmistha Nath, Member (W).

 

Date of filing:     30.12.2016

Date of Order:   27.11.2018

 

For the complainant           :           Sri P.K.Routray,Adv. & Associates.

For the  O.Ps.1 & 2              :          Mr. G.P.Dutta,Adv. & Associates.

 

Sri Dhruba Charan Barik,President.

                The complainant has filed this case alleging therein deficiency in service on the part O.Ps and sought for reliefs against them in terms of her prayer in the consumer complaint.

1. The facts of the complainant’s case briefly stated in the complaint are that her deceased husband Manoraranjan Behera had insured his Hero Honda Passion Plus Motorcycle bearing No.OR-05-AH-0618 with the O.Ps vide policy No.55030231150100003660.  On 12.3.16 while he was returning from Berhampur to Cuttack on his motorcycle he met with an accident at Khurda by-pass near Barunei Chhack.  He expired at the spot and the bike was damaged.  The complainant lodged a claim with the O.P No.2 and filed all relevant documents and death certificate of her husband for settlement of her claim.  Annexure-1 series are copies of the policy and such death certificate.  She was asked by the O.P.2 to file a declaration of cancellation of Registration of the said damaged vehicle.  Copy of the said letter dt.3.9.16 of O.P No.2 has been filed and marked as Annexure-2.  The complainant complied with the said letter and filed the declaration of cancellation endorsement of  R.C.Book.  Copy of which has been filed and marked as Anenxure-3.  Despite fulfillment of all the requirements as per the demand of O.P.2, her claim could not be settled.  Then the complainant sent a legal notice to the O.P No.2 through her advocate on 14.10.16.  A copy of the said legal notice has been filed and marked as Anenxure-4.  Thereafter the O.P.2 asked the complainant through registered letter with A.D to file no objection from the parents of her deceased husband.  Annexure-5 is the copy of the said registered letter received from O.P.2.  The aforesaid requirement was also complied with in the form of affidavit by the parents of her deceased husband.  Annexure-6 is the copy of the said affidavit.  Thereafter, O.P.2 issued another letter by registered post to the complainant stating to file no objection from the mother of her deceased husband.  Annexure-7 is the said letter received from O.P.2.  That demand was also complied with by the complainant.  Annexure-8 series are the copies of the no objection certificate and declaration.
2. Despite fulfillment of all the requirements made by O.P.2, he did not settle the claim of the complainant for a long period which caused unnecessary harassment and mental tension to her.  It is tantamount to deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps.  It is stated that she is not even financially sound to meet the educational expenditure of her minor daughters.  As such the complainant has prayed to give necessary direction to O.P.2 to pay the policy amount of Rs.1,14,000/-, expenditure towards issuing legal notice Rs.10,000/- and compensation amount of Rs.3,50,000/-, altogether Rs.4,74,000/- to her in the interest of justice.
3. The O.ps entered appearance and contested the case.  In the joint written version filed by the O.Ps, it is stated that the case is not maintainable since the complainant is not a consumer and there is no cause of action to file the case.  It is specifically stated that on 30.3.16 the father of the insured obtained a claim form from the O.Ps to lodge a claim which was resisted by the present complainant.  On 20.5.16 another claim form was given to her on her demand and then the surveyor was deputed to conduct survey on 24.5.16.  On 4.7.16 the surveyor submitted final report and assessed the net loss at Rs.14,000/-on total loss basis  taking into account the entire materials damaged in accident and the said amount has been credited to the account of the complainant vide discharge voucher No.1617000731 dt.30.12.2016 .  Annexure-A is the copy of the said surveyor’s report.  It was towards full and final settlement of the claim of the complainant and thereafter no cause of action survives.  It is stated that so far as the personal accident is concerned, the complainant has not submitted the claim to the office of the O.Ps although she has received the form from the O.P on 17.1.16.  For that reason she was requested by the O.P vide registered letter dt.12.1.17 to submit the personal accident claim form duly filled in for their consideration towards settlement of claim failing which the file had to be closed as ‘No claim’.  Despite it the complainant has not complied with the request of the O.Ps.  Annexure-B & C are respectively copies of the letter showing receipt of the claim form by the complainant as well as the copy of the letter dt.12.1.17 along with postal receipts.  It is therefore stated that there is no delay or negligence on the part of the O.P in settlement of the claim of the complainant and as such the consumer complaint may be dismissed with cost.
4. It is important to leave a mention here that during pendency of this case, the complainant has already received Rs.14,000/- and Rs.1 lakh separately from the O.Ps towards her claim and a memo to this effect signed by her advocate on 30.8.17 has been filed in this case.
5. With regard to compensation and litigation cost as claimed by the complainant, it is   no doubt that there has been inordinate delay which caused hardship and mental tension to the complainant in awarding claim to her and for that reason she needs to be compensated. Hence ordered;

 

ORDER

The consumer complaint is allowed on contest against the O.Ps.  The complainant has already received Rs.1,14,000/- towards the policy amount.  The O.Ps are further directed to pay Rs.50,000/- to the complainant towards compensation for hardship and mental agony caused to her  and Rs.5000/- towards cost of litigation.  This order shall be given effect to within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

Typed to dictation, corrected and pronounced by the Hon’ble President in the Open Court on this the 27^th    day of November,2018  under the seal and signature of this Forum.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       (Sri D.C.Barik)

                                                                                                                     President.

 

               ( Smt. Sarmistha Nath )

                                                                                                            Member (W)