View 45238 Cases Against General Insurance
Vijay kumar filed a consumer case on 26 Feb 2016 against H.D.F.C. Ergo General Insurance Company ltd through its Manager, . in the Yamunanagar Consumer Court. The case no is CC/287/2014 and the judgment uploaded on 29 Jun 2016.
BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, YAMUNA NAGAR
Complaint No. 287 of 2014
Date of institution: 04.07.2014.
Date of decision: 26.02.2016.
Vijay Kumar aged about 40 years son of Shri Sat Pal, resident of village Ballewala, Tehsil Chhachhrauli, District Yamuna Nagar.
…Complainant.
Versus
H.D.F.C. Ergo General Insurance Company Limited, through its Manager, Near Nirankari Bhawan, Jagadhri Road, Yamuna Nagar.
… Respondent.
BEFORE: SH. ASHOK KUMAR GARG, PRESIDENT
SH. S.C.SHARMA, MEMBER.
Present: Sh. V.K.Rajoria, Advocate, counsel for complainant.
OP already ex-parte vide order dated 21.8.2014.
ORDER
1. Complainant Vijay Kumar filed this complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 praying therein that respondent (hereinafter referred as OP) be directed to pay an amount of Rs. 36590/- alongwith 24% per annum interest till its actual realization and further to pay Rs. 20,000/- for mental agony and harassment with Rs. 11,000/- as litigation expenses.
2. Brief facts of the present case, as alleged by the complainant, are that tractor bearing registration No. HR-71G-2825 of the complainant, which was insured with the OP Insurance Company vide policy bearing No. 231620058265200000, met with an accident and badly damaged. Intimation regarding this accident was given to the OP insurance company and survey was conducted and the said tractor was got repaired from M/s Sheela Motors, Jagadhri. The OP Insurance Company was also pleased to pass a claim to the tune of Rs. 1,02,881/- but very strangely the OP Insurance Company had deducted an amount of Rs. 36590/- on account of salvage and has released only Rs. 63369.75. It has been further mentioned that OP Insurance Company was bound to release entire amount of the claim to the Sheela Motors and it was duty of the officials of the OP Insurance Company to pick the salvage from the Sheela Motors. The salvage is still lying with the Sheela Motors Jagadhri and official of the Sheela Motors Jagadhri are pressing hard to the complainant to pay the remaining amount to them which has been wrongly and illegally deducted from the loss assessed by the surveyor on account of salvage. The surveyor report/calculation sheet for assessing the loss is Annexure C-1 as the Op Insurance Company has wrongly and illegally deducted an amount of Rs. 36590/-. Hence, there is clear cut deficiency in service on the part of OP Insurance Company. The complainant has also sent a legal notice dated 28.5.2014 copy of which is Annexure C-2 but the OP Insurance Company has not paid any heed to the genuine request of the complainant. Hence, this complaint.
3. Registered notice was sent on 19.7.2014 vide letter No. RH041176846 IN for the date of 21.8.2014 which was refused to accept by the Op Insurance Company which is evident from the report dated 21.7.2014 of postal authority made on envelope enclosed with the file. None appeared on behalf of OP on 21.8.2014 despite several calls since morning. Hence, he was proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 21.8.2014.
4. To prove his case, complainant tendered into evidence his affidavit as Annexure CW/A and documents such as photo copy of assessment sheet/calculation sheet Annexure C-1, copy of legal notice as Annexure C-2 and closed his evidence.
5. We have heard the learned counsel for the complainant and have gone through the pleadings as well as documents placed on file very carefully and minutely.
6. After hearing the counsel for the complainant, we are of the considered view that there is no deficiency in service on the part of OP Insurance Company as the complainant has totally failed to prove his case with the cogent evidence that surveyor report/ loss assessed including the value of salvage has not been correctly assessed by the surveyor. The only plea of the complainant is that an amount of Rs. 36,590/- has been wrongly deducted by the OP Insurance Company but failed to explain in what manner the OP Insurance Company has wrongly deducted the value of salvage. Further the complainant has not filed any documentary evidence or any letter written to the OP Insurance Company for handing over the salvage. We have perused the calculation sheet minutely and after going through the contents of this report it is evident that major parts of the body as well as front and rear rims, fuel tank, front bonnet, steering assy etc. were replaced and these items might have carrying some salvage value. It may be higher or lessor but it cannot be said that there was no salvage.The complainant has not filed any report of any surveyor to controvert the assessment/calculation sheet of the OP Insurance Company and has not filed any cogent documentary evidence by which he has requested the insurance company to take over the possession of the salvage which was lying on the workshop of Sheela Motors.
7. Further the complainant has not disclosed in his entire complaint that on what date the tractor in question met with an accident and got it repaired from the Sheela Motors and further has not disclosed on what date he has received the assessed amount of Rs. 63369.75 from the OP Insurance Company. Even, the complainant has not disclosed the valid date and expiry date of the insurance policy in question and has not filed copy of insurance policy with his complaint. We have perused all the documents including surveyor report/calculation sheet, legal notice, affidavit of the complainant as well as complaint but in all these documents complainant has not mentioned a single iota of word regarding the date, month and year in respect of facts mentioned in the complaint.
8. Moreover, it is a settled proposition of law that credence should be given to the surveyor report and the complainant also failed to point out any discrepancy or ambiguity in the surveyor report and in the absence of any cogent evidence in rebuttal we cannot ignore the report of surveyor. Although in the present complaint, the OP Insurance Company has not appeared before this Forum and also not joined the proceedings, but it does not give any right to the complainant to take the benefit of this, as it is well settled law that the complainant is to stand on its own legs without taking the benefits of other party and the burden lies on the complainant to prove his case with the cogent/reasonable evidence. Hence, we have no option except to dismiss the present complaint.
9. Resultantly, we find no merit in the present complaint and the same is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs. Copies of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of costs as per rules. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced in open court. 26.02.2016.
( ASHOK KUMAR GARG)
PRESIDENT
(S.C.SHARMA)
MEMBER
Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes
Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.