District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission ,Faridabad.
Consumer Complaint No. 564/2021
Date of Institution:02.11.2021
Date of Order:22.03.2023.
Asha Devi aged 34 years wife of late Shri Neeraj Kumar resident of House No. 178, Sector-16, Faridabad, Haryana, Adhar No. 586006825660, Mobile No. 9873412152.
…….Complainant……..
Versus
1. HDFC Ergo General Insurance Company Ltd., Unit No. 205, 2nd floor, Ratan Square Building, 30A, Vidhan Sabha Marg, Lucknow – 226001 through Anand Sinha, Claim Manager.
2. Bijender Kaushik, Agent of HDFC ERGO General Insurance Company Ltd.,, Policy Bazar Insurance Web Aggregator Pvt. Ltd., R/o village Dayalpur, Tehsil Ballabgarh, Distt. Faridabad.
…Opposite parties
Complaint under section-12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986
Now amended Section 34 of Consumer protection Act 2019.
BEFORE: Amit Arora……………..President
Mukesh Sharma…………Member.
Indira Bhadana………….Member.
PRESENT: Sh. Devinder Singh Pahil, counsel for the complainant.
Sh. D.K.Gosain , counsel for opposite party No.1.
Opposite party No.2 ex-parte vide order dated 10.05.2022.
ORDER:
The facts in brief of the complaint are that the husband of the complainant expired in a road accident on 27.10.2018, while driving his Bajaj Avenger M/cycle NO. HR-51BL-1050 on dated 27.10.2018. The FIR of the said incident was registered FIR No. 0170/2018, P.s. Pishava, Aligarh (UP). The post mortem report and Kalendra u/s 174 Cr.P.C. was also conducted there. The above said Bajaj Avenger M/cycle No. HR-51BL-1050 was insured by the opposite party company and the policy No. 2312100365174300 000 valid from 1.10.2018 to 17.10.2019. The accidental death of the owner of the above said vehicle fully covered under that policy. The complainant being widow of deceased Neeraj Kumar and nominee in the said insurance policy, so the opposite party was fully liable to pay compensation under the said said policy No. 2312100365174300 000. The complainant with the help of her relative Mr. Naveen Kumar submitted all documents for the above said claim to opposite party No.2 within time as per the prescribed amount. After a span of time o few months neither the claim of the death was reimbursed by the opposite party company, despite of many reminders of that purpose. In the month of March 2021 the complainant alongwith her relative Mr. Naveen Kumar visited the office of opposite party No.1 and again submitted the entire required documents again in their office and requested the opposite party No.1 to settle the claim as earliest as possible, but the opposite party No.1 replied to the complainant that they were a nation vide insurance company and they would settle their claim very soon and intimated the complainant accordingly. The opposite party No.2 also told the complainant that the higher official of the opposite party had already rejected the claim of the complainant and now the claim would only be settled after taking legal steps. The complainant sent legal notice dated 24.09.201to the opposite party through registered post but all in vain. The aforesaid act of opposite party amounts to deficiency of service and hence the complaint. The complainant has prayed for directions to the opposite party to:
a) release the claim of the deceased Neeraj Kumar against policy No. 2312100365174300 valid from 18.10.2018 to 17.10.2019 in favour of the complainant alongwith interest from @ 24% p.a.
b) pay Rs. 5,00,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment .
c) pay Rs. 11,000 /-as litigation expenses.
2. Opposite party No.1 put in appearance through counsel and filed written statement wherein Opposite party No.1 refuted claim of the complainant and submitted that the complainant had neither any cause of action nor locus standi to file the present complaint. After receipt of documents sent by the complainant and on scrutiny of documents submitted by the complainant vide letter dated 13.03.2019 sent by the replying opposite party, the complainant was requested to provide the police final report/charge sheet and thereafter letter dated 03.10.2019 was also sent and documents were asked for processing of the claim but were not provided to the insurance company and as such vide letter dated 16.01.2020, the insurance company close the claim as “NO claim” because inspite of best efforts, documents required vide their letters were not submitted by the complainant. Opposite party No.1 denied rest of the allegations leveled in the complaint and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
3. Case called several times since morning but none appeared on behalf of opposite party No.2. Therefore, opposite party No.2 was proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 10.05.2022.
4. The parties led evidence in support of their respective versions.
5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record on the file.
6. In this case the complaint was filed by the complainant against opposite party–HDFC Ergo General Insurance Company Ltd. with the prayer to: a) release the claim of the deceased Neeraj Kumar against policy No. 2312100365174300 valid from 18.10.2018 to 17.10.2019 in favour of the complainant alongwith interest from @ 24% p.a. b pay Rs. 5,00,000/- as c
ompensation for causing mental agony and harassment . c) pay Rs. 11,000 /-as litigation expenses.
To establish his case the complainant has led in his evidence, Ex. PW-1 - affidavit of Ms. Asha Devi, Ex.P-1 – postal receipt, Ex.P2 – legal notice,, Ex.P3 – death certificate, Ex.P4 – FIR & other documents,, Ex.P5 – Medical Record Section M.L.C Form,, Ex.P6 – Adhaar card,.
On the other hand counsel for the opposite party No.1 strongly agitated and opposed. As per the evidence of the opposite party No.1 Ex.RW1/A – affidavit of Shweta Pokhriyal – Sr. Manager-Legal, HDFC ERGO General Insurance Co. Ltd., 5th floor, Tower-1, Stellar IT Park, C-25, Sector-62, Noida, Ex.R-1 – Motor insurance – Two Wheeler Comprehensive Policy, Ex.R2 -letter dated 13.3.2019, Ex,R-3 – letter dated 03.10.2019, Ex.R-4 - No claim letter dated Jan. 16,2020.
7. In this case, the husband of the complainant expired in a road accident on 27.10.2018, while driving his Bajaj Avenger M/cycle No. HR-51BL-1050 on dated 27.10.2018. The FIR of the said incident was registered FIR No. 0170/2018, P.S. Pishava, Aligarh (UP). The post mortem report and Kalendra u/s 174 Cr.P.C. was also conducted there. The above said Bajaj Avenger M/cycle No. HR-51BL-1050 was insured by the opposite party company and the policy No. 2312100365174300 000 valid from 1.10.2018 to 17.10.2019. As per letter dated 16.01.2020 vide Ex.R4, opposite party closed the file as NO claim, subject to submit the required documents.
8. After going through the evidence led by the parties, the Commission is of the opinion that the complaint is allowed. Opposite party is directed to process the claim of the complainant, subject to submission of documents within 30 days from the date of receipt of the copy of order and pay the due amount to the complainant along with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of filing of complaint till its realization. The opposite party is also directed to pay Rs.2200/- as compensation on account of mental tension, agony and harassment alongwith Rs.2200/- as litigation expenses to the complainant. Copy of this order be given to the parties concerned free of costs and file be consigned to record room.
Announced on: 22.03.2023 (Amit Arora)
President
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Faridabad.
(Mukesh Sharma)
Member
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Faridabad.
(Indira Bhadana)
Member
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Faridabad.
