BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SIRSA.

                                                          Consumer Complaint no. 153 of 2011                                                                       

                                                           Date of Institution         :    14.6.2011

                                                          Date of Decision   : 28.7.2016

Baruwali II Co-op Transport Society Ltd., VPO Baruwali,  tehsil Dabwali, district Sirsa through its President Gurmail Singh.

            ….Complainant.                     

                   Versus

HDFC ERGO General Insurance Company Ltd., through its Divisional Officer, Ludiana.

                                                                             ..…Opposite party.

            Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986.

Before:        SHRI S.B.LOHIA………………………………..PRESIDENT

          SHRI RANBIR SINGH PANGHAL ……….……MEMBER.

Present:       Sh.R.D.Bishnoi,  Advocate for the complainant.

Sh.R.K.Mehta, Advocate for opposite party.

ORDER

                   Case of complainant, in brief, is that the complainant is a Co-operative Society VPO Baruwali and is running a bus no. HR-57-1513, which was insured with the opposite party vide policy  no.VC00070063000100  w.e.f. 15.1.2010 to 14.1.2011 at Sirsa. On 16.1.2010, the said bus of complainant  met with accident  and badly damaged. The opposite party was informed about the accident. The officials of opposite party inspected the spot and asked the complainant to get repaired the said bus and to produce the bills. Thereafter, the complainant got repaired the bus from different mechanics and spent about Rs.2 lacs on repair of the bus. The complainant also paid Rs.4200/- to Sh.Hari Om Crane Service  for bringing the bus from the accident place to the shop of mechanic. After that, the complainant lodged claim for compensation on this account in the office of opposite party, who asked the complainant to complete all the papers formalities in this regard. But, after completion of all the formalities, the opposite party did not pay the claim of the damaged bus. Hence, the present complaint for payment of Rs.2 lacs for compensation besides compensation for harassment, humiliation, mental agony etc. and also for litigation expenses.

2.                The opposite party has filed its reply and denied the averments of complaint. It is denied that on 16.1.2010 the bus of complainant met with an accident and badly damaged due to that accident. Giving of information about the accident to the opposite party by the complainant is also denied.  The fact regarding repairing of bus by the complainant at his own is also denied. However, it is pleaded that in fact, the complainant has not submitted the desired documents to the opposite party,

3.                In order to make out his case, the complainant has placed on record  various documents i.e. Ex.C1 to Ex.C27 besides his affidavit Ex.CW1, whereas the opposite party has tendered in evidence the documents Ex.R1 to Ex.R3.

4.                We have gone through the record of the case carefully and have heard learned counsel for both the parties.

5.                Learned counsel for the complainant has argued that the Op failed to decide the claim case of the complainant till date, which amounts to deficiency in service and complainant is entitled for the relief sought for. On the other hand, learned counsel for the Op argued that the complainant did not file claim form and other documents despite of repeated written letters and as such, Op was unable to decide the claim and there is no deficiency on its part.  The main question of insurance of accidental bus bearing registration No. HR-57-1513 during the period of insurance is admitted. There is no document on the record to decide the controversy between both the parties, as detailed above. As such, any deficiency cannot be attributed to either of the parties. The case is pending before this Forum since June 2011.

6.                In the circumstances discussed above, Op- company is directed to settle the claim in question within two months from today. However, if any document is required from the complainant to settle the claim, Op can call for the same from the complainant through written letters and not verbally. Complainant is also directed to fulfill the requirement of the insurance company, if any by submitting the relevant papers at the earliest against proper receipt in order to settle the claim within the stipulated period. The complaint stands disposed off accordingly. No order as to costs. Copy of this order be given to the parties as per rules. File be consigned to record room after due compliance

Announced in open Forum.                                  President,

Dated:                                                          District Consumer Disputes

                                                                   Redressal Forum, Sirsa.

                             Member.