Haryana

Yamunanagar

CC/141/2011

Vinod Sharma S/o IIam Chand Sharma - Complainant(s)

Versus

I.C.I.C.I Lombard General Insurance Co.Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Sanjay Dhiman

05 Dec 2016

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, YAMUNA NAGAR

 

                                                                                         Complaint No. 141 of 2011.

                                                                                         Date of institution: 17.02.2011.

                                                                                         Date of decision: 05.12.2016

Vinod Sharma aged about 29 years son of Sh. Ilam Chand Sharma, resident of H. No. 1078, Jammu Colony-B, Wad No. 27, Yamuna Nagar,  Tehsil Jagadhri, Distt. Yamuna Nagar.

                                                                                                                 

                                                                                                                             …Complainant.

1. I.C.I.C.. Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd. I.C.I.C.I. Bank Towers, Bandra Kurla Complex Mumbai-400051, through its General Manager.
2. I.C.I.C.I. Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd. Commercial Belt, Near City Hospital, Sector-17, HUDA, Jagadhri near NOKIA Care, Tehsil Jagadhri, District Yamuna Nagar, through its Branch Manager.                                                                                                                                     

                                                                                                                             …Respondents. 

 

BEFORE:         SH. ASHOK KUMAR GARG…………….. PRESIDENT.

                         SH. S.C.SHARMA………………………….MEMBER.

 

Present:  Sh. Sanjay Dhiman, Advocate, counsel for complainant.  

               Sh. Parmod Gupta, Advocate, counsel for respondents.

             

ORDER

 

1.                     Complainant Vinod Sharma has filed the present complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act. 1986, praying therein that respondents (hereinafter referred as OPs) be directed to pay the amount on account of damage of motorcycle and also to pay compensation as well as litigation expenses.

2.                     Brief facts of the complaint, as alleged by the complainant, are that on 21.01.2009, the motorcycle bearing registration No. HR-02P-5471 make TVS Star City which was insured with the OPs Insurance Company vide policy bearing No. 3005/54020713/00000 dated 10.05.2008 valid from 17.05.2008 to 16.05.2009, met with an accident and badly damaged. Accordingly, the complainant got his motorcycle repaired from M/s Harsh Motors, Yamuna Nagar and paid a sum of Rs. 14,996/- and Rs. 504/- i.e. total amount of Rs. 15,500/- vide Bill No. WS-1565 dated 25.03.2009. After that complainant lodged the claim regarding loss of motorcycle in question with the Ops Insurance Company and completed all the formalities and supplied all the documents. Thereafter, the complainant has requested so many times but the OPs Insurance Company started putting off the matter on one pretext or the other. A legal notice dated 22.09.2010 was also served upon the OPs Insurance Company but despite that OPs Insurance Company has not paid any amount. As such, there is a deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs. Hence this complaint.

3.                     Upon notice, OPs Insurance Company appeared and filed its written statement by taking some preliminary objections such as, as per record maintained in the ordinary and regular course of business by the OPs Insurance Company, no claim is reported to be lodged with the OPs Insurance Company under the Insurance Policy in question; complainant has concocted and manipulated the whole story to get the false claim and on merit it has been stated that no claim has ever been reported to the OPs Insurance Company by the complainant nor has submitted any copy of FIR, DDR, Estimate, Photographs etc. so, the question of deputing the surveyor does not arise at all. If, it is so, then certainly the complainant would have been in possession of intimation letter of the surveyor and the name and address of the surveyor and as such the complainant be directed to produce the same. Rest contents of the complaint were denied being false and concocted one. Lastly, prayed for dismissal of complaint.

4.                     To prove the case, counsel for complainant tendered into evidence affidavit of complainant as Annexure CW/A and documents such as photo copy of OPD slip dated 27.01.2009 of J.P. Hospital as Annexure C-1, Photo copy of insurance policy as Annexure C-2, Photo copy of bill of Harsh Motors as Annexure C-3, Copy of legal notice dated 22.09.2010 as Annexure C-4, Postal receipts and acknowledgement as Annexure C-5 and C-6 and closed the evidence on behalf of complainant.

5.                     On the other hand, counsel for the OPs Insurance Company tendered into evidence affidavit of Sh. Gurpreet Bhullar, Manager (Legal) as Annexure RW/A  and closed the evidence on behalf of OPs. 

6.                     We have heard the learned counsel of both the parties and have gone through the pleadings as well as documents placed on the file carefully and minutely.

7.                     The only grievances of the complainant is that his motorcycle bearing registration No. HR-02P-5471 make TVS Star met with an accident on 21.01.2009 and badly damaged, upon which the complainant spent Rs. 15,500/- on is repair and a claim was lodged with the Ops Insurance Company but the OPs Insurance Company has not paid a single penny to the complainant. Learned counsel for the complainant draw our attentions towards the copy of legal notice dated 22.09.2010 (Annexure C-4) and copy of bill dated 25.03.2009 (Annexure C-3) and argued that despite so many requests the OPs Insurance Company has not paid the genuine claim of the complainant.

8.                     On the other hand, learned counsel for the OPs Insurance Company argued at length that no claim has ever been reported to the OPs Insurance Company by the complainant nor the complainant has submitted any copy of FIR, DDR, estimate or photographs etc. so, the question of deputing any surveyor does not arise at all. Learned counsel for the OPs Insurance Company further argued that even the complainant has failed to produce the necessary documents i.e. copy of driving license, copy of RC of motorcycle in question, copy of estimate and copy of any intimation letter or any letter received from the OPs Insurance Company before this Forum. Learned counsel for the OPs also draw our attention towards the application filed on 10.06.2011 for dismissing the complaint on the ground that the complainant be directed to produce the above noted documents and argued that despite this application, the complainant has not placed on file any such documents. Learned counsel for the OPs further argued that complaint of the complainant is also hopelessly time barred as the alleged accident took place on 21.01.2009 whereas the present complaint has been filed on 17.02.2011 i.e. after a period of 2 years and referred the section 24(a) of the Consumer Protection Act wherein it has been specifically mentioned that the District Forum shall not admit a complaint unless it is filed within a period of 2 years from the date of which the cause of action has arisen. No application for condonation of delay or any explanation has been given in the complaint itself by the complainant. Lastly, prayed for dismissal of complaint.

9.                     After hearing both the parties, we are of the considered view that there is no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs Insurance Company as the complainant has totally failed to prove that he ever lodged the claim with the Ops Insurance Company and submitted all the documents and completed all the formalities. The present complaint has been filed on 17.02.2011 and the complainant has only tendered into evidence a photo copy of bill Annexure C-3 and copy of legal notice dated 22.09.2010 in support of his case but has totally failed to produce any letter vide which he informed/lodged the claim with the OPs Insurance Company. Even, the complainant has also failed to disclose the name of surveyor. Further, the complainant neither placed on file any copy of registration certificate or copy of driving license which are necessary documents to decide and settle the claim of the complainant nor has filed any copy of FIR, DDR or photographs of the damaged motorcycle in question. In the absence of any cogent evidence, this Forum is unable to hold that the complainant is entitled to get any relief.

10.                   Resultantly, we find no merit in the p resent 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.  05.12.2016.

                       

                                                                                    (ASHOK KUMAR GARG )

                                                                                    PRESIDENT,

 

                                                                                     

                                                                                    (S.C.SHARMA )

                                                                                     MEMBER.