Orissa

StateCommission

A/131/2016

M/s. Odessey Motor(P) Ltd. - Complainant(s)

Versus

Harishankar Nanda - Opp.Party(s)

M/s. S.K. Samal & Assoc.

24 Apr 2023

ORDER

IN THE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
ODISHA, CUTTACK
 
First Appeal No. A/131/2016
( Date of Filing : 21 Mar 2016 )
(Arisen out of Order Dated 10/02/2016 in Case No. Complaint Case No. CC/65/2014 of District Sambalpur)
 
1. M/s. Odessey Motor(P) Ltd.
M.D., Sri Yogesh Jalan,S/o- Ashok Kumar Jalan, Odyssey Complex, Ainthapali, Sambalpur.
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. Harishankar Nanda
S/o- Late Nityananda Nanda, Subasini Colony, Dhankauda, Sadar, Sambalpur.
2. The B.M., Maruti Insurance
Odessey Motors Pvt. Ltd., Ainthapali, Sambalpur.
3. The Branch Manager, National Insurance Co. Ltd.,
Nayapara, Sambalpur.
...........Respondent(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Dr. D.P. Choudhury PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MR. Pramode Kumar Prusty. MEMBER
 HON'BLE MS. Sudhiralaxmi Pattnaik MEMBER
 
PRESENT:M/s. S.K. Samal & Assoc., Advocate for the Appellant 1
 M/s. P.K. Panda & Assoc., Advocate for the Respondent 1
 M/S.N.B.Das & Assoc, Advocate for the Respondent 1
Dated : 24 Apr 2023
Final Order / Judgement

                      

                  Heard learned counsel for  both the parties.

2.              This appeal is  filed  U/S-15 of erstwhile  Consumer Protection Act,1986(herein-after called the Act). Hereinafter, the parties to this appeal shall be referred to  with reference to their respective status before the learned District Forum.

3.                   The case  of the  complainant, in nutshell  is that  the complainant being owner  of  a Maruti Alto 800 LXI car  bearing   bearing Regd.No. OD-15-A-2059 had purchased  policy for the vehicle from the OP  covering the period from 22.05.2013 to 21.05.2014 on payment of  due premium.   It is alleged inter-alia that during currency of the policy, the vehicle met accident and it was repaired by the appellant-company. The matter was informed to the insurer who  after due survey paid Rs.17,151/- but the appellant took Rs.4200/- towards other charges for repairing.  The complainant alleged that over this insurance compensation,  Rs.4200/- should be refundable  by the appellant to the complainant. Since, the appellant did not pay back  same, the complaint was filed.

4.            The OP      took the plea that they have already paid the amount and the items  being  not covered  under  insurance policy is also payable on repair  as per insurance charges. Therefore, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the OP.

.5.                       After hearing both the parties, learned District Forum   passed the following order:-

               Xxxx              xxxx              xxxx

                                “ Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances discussed above, we allow the case of the complainant against the OP No.1 on ex-parte and direct  the OP No.1 to refund to the complainant an amount of Rs.4200/-(Rupees Four thousand two hundred) with interest @ 18(Eighteen) per cent per annum from the date of receipt i.e. 16.08.2013, the date of realization till the date of payment. OP No.1 is further directed to pay to the complainant Rs.4,000/-(Rupees Four thousand) towards compensation for causing mental agony and harassment. The OP No.1 has to comply this order within one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order, failing which the awarded compensation amount will carry interest @ 9(nine) per cent per annum from the date of order till the date of payment.”

6.                  Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that   learned District Forum,without considering the policy in question, and the repairing charges for not covering the parts of the vehicle paid has passed this order. Since, it is illegal, same should be   set-aside by allowing the appeal.

7.                   Learned counsel for the respondent submitted that they have already paid the insurance amount as admissible to the complainant.  

8.               Considered the submission of learned counsel for the parties,  perused the DFR and impugned order.

9.               When the amount has already received from the insurer by the complainant towards final settlement, no further amount is payable by the insurer to the complainant. It appears that  the amount extra received  from the complainant for Rs.4200/- for part of vehicle  being not covered  by the assessment made by the insurer, same is payable by the complainant. Moreover, when complainant has received amount of settlement of claim without any protest, no further cause of action arises.

10.             Therefore, the impugned order having not taken into all those aspects, we hereby set-aside  same  and the appeal stands allowed. No cost.

                  Free copy of the order be supplied to the respective parties or they may download same from the confonet  or webtsite of this  Commission to treat same as copy of order received from this Commission.  

                 DFR be sent back forthwith.

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Dr. D.P. Choudhury]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Pramode Kumar Prusty.]
MEMBER
 
 
[HON'BLE MS. Sudhiralaxmi Pattnaik]
MEMBER
 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

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.