Haryana

Ambala

CC/362/2018

Ramvir - Complainant(s)

Versus

ICICI Lombard Gen Inss CO - Opp.Party(s)

Rajiv Sachdeva

11 Dec 2019

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AMBALA

 

                                                          Complaint case no.         : 362 of 2018

                                                          Date of Institution           : 02.11.2018                                                                            

                                                                 Date of   decision    : 11.12.2019

 

Ramvir son of Shri Prabhu R/o VPO-ATTA, Tehsil-Smaalkha, District Panipat.    

                   ……. Complainant.
Versus

 

1. Metro Motors Pvt. Ltd., At-Kilometers-10, G.T.Road, Opposite-Mohri Railway Station, Mohra-Ambala-133004.
2. ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd. Tirloki Chambers, 1^st Floor, SCO-4307/4/21 Ambala City, Ambala. 134003, through its Manager/Authorized Person.
3. ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd., 2^nd Floor, Sec-8, SCO-3 HUDA Market Karnal, through its Manager Suresh/Authorized Person.
4. ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd., Registered office ICICI Lombard House, 414, Veer Savarkar Marg, Nr. Sidhi Vinayak Temple, Prabha Devi, Mumbai, Maharasthra-400025, Through its Director.

 

          ….…. Opposite Parties.

 

Before:        Smt. Neena Sandhu, President.

                   Smt. Ruby Sharma, Member.

Shri Vinod Kumar Sharma, Member.         

                            

Present:       Shri Rajiv Sachdeva, Advocate, counsel for complainant.

Shri S.R.Bansal, Advocate, counsel for the OP No.1.

Shri Rajesh Kumar, Advocate, counsel for OPs No.2 to 4.

         

Order:        Smt. Neena Sandhu, President.

Complainant has filed this complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) against the Opposite Parties (hereinafter referred to as ‘OPs’), praying for issuance of following direction to them:

1. To pay the claim amount i.e INSURED DECLAIRED VALUE (IDV) of Rs.3,00,000/-.
2. To pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation for the mental agony and physical harassment suffered by him.
3. To pay Rs.11,000/- as litigation expenses.
382.  

Any other relief which this Hon’ble Forum may deem fit.

 

Brief facts of the case are that the complainant had purchased a vehicle TATA ACE bearing Registration No.HR-67A-8860 for earning his livelihood. He got it insured from the OP No.1, who is the authorized agent of OP No.4, vide policy No.3003/TM-100004784/00/B00 valid from 12.04.2016 to 11.04.2017. At the time of insurance, he paid premium of Rs.21,821/- and the OP company accessed the insured value of the above said vehicle i.e IDV of Rs.3,00,000/-. On 4^th/5^th May, 2016 midnight when the said vehicle was being driven by the driver namely Satyawan son of Raj Kumar, near the By Pass of SEWAH, Distt. Panipat, suddenly it got caught fire due to internal fault, as a result whereof it got totally damaged. He immediately approached the police, who prepared burning report of its vehicle. He sought information under RTI, vide RTI No.1976 dated 01.05.2018, from the police regarding the burning report of his vehicle. He received a reply from it that no record is available with them. He visited several times to the office of OP i.e Insurance Company and requested to provide him the claim amount, but they lingered on the matter on one pretext or the another. In the month of April 2017, the officials of the insurance company refused to pay the claim amount. Thereafter, he sent a legal notice twice, to the OP No.2 & 3, but of no avail. By not paying the claim amount, the OPs have committed deficiency in service. Hence, the present complaint.

2.                Upon notice, OP No.1 appeared through counsel and filed written version, raising preliminary objection regarding maintainability. On merits, it is stated that the grievance of the complainant is not related to it. Further denying all other averments of the complaint prayed for dismissal of the complaint again it with costs.

                    Upon notice, OP No. 2 to 4 appeared through counsel and filed written version, raising preliminary objections regarding maintainability, estoppel and  not coming to this Forum with clean hands and. On merits, it is stated that the complainant is not using the vehicle rather gave it on rent/lease to Shri Satyawan. They have requested the complainant several times to submit certain documents, but the he failed to submit the documents as sought for. Until and unless the complainant submit the documents, they are unable to prove further. They have not received any legal notice. There is no deficiency on their part and the complaint filed against them may be dismissed with costs.

3                 Learned counsel for complainant tendered affidavit of complainant and affidavit of Shri Satyawan son of Raj Kumar R/o Risalu, Panipat as Annexure C-A, C-B & C-C respectively along with documents as annexure C-1 to C-10 and closed the evidence on behalf of complainant. On the other hand, counsel for the OP No. 1 has tendered affidavit of Y.P.Dass, Director Metro Motors, Ambala Cantt. as Annexure OP1/A and closed the evidence on behalf of OP No.1. Learned counsel for OPs No.2 to 4 tendered affidavit of Nishant Gera, Authorized Officer/Manager Legal, ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd., as Annexure OP2/A alongwith documents as Annexure OP2/1 to OP2/8 and closed the evidence on behalf of OPs No.2 to 4.

4.                We have heard counsel for the parties and have carefully gone through the case file. 

5.                From the perusal of the Annexure OP2/7, it is evident that the complainant had suffered a statement to the effect that about 8-9 months ago, he met with an accident due to which his hand got injured badly and after that he handed over his vehicle to Satyawan son of Raj Kumar on lease, who is paying Rs.5,000/- per month to him. He is taking care of the vehicle and also paying the loan installments. Since, it is not disputed that the complainant was unable to drive the vehicle because his hand got injured in the accident. It may be stated here that due to injury in his hand the complainant was compelled to hand over his vehicle to Satyawan, so that he can get income of Rs.5,000/- per month, for earning his livelihood. Under these circumstances, the claim of the complainant cannot be defeated. Even otherwise, the OPs No.2 to 4 have not placed on record any terms and conditions of the policy, on the basis of which they can deny the claim, if the vehicle is leased out to someone else. So far as non submission of the documents with the OPs No.2 to 4 is concerned. Though it has been claimed by the complainant that he had submitted all the documents with the OPs. Be that as it may, we feel it fit that the complainant should be directed to handover the copies of the requisite documents to the OPs No.2 to 4, for settlement of his claim. So far as the complaint filed against OP No.1 is concerned. It may be stated here that the complainant has alleged that his vehicle got burnt due to some inherent manufacturing defect in it, but to prove this fact he has neither placed on record any documentary evidence nor any expert report. Even otherwise, by filing the present complaint, complainant is seeking to get the insurance claim i.e IDV of the vehicle in question and which has to be given by the Insurance Company only. In this view of the matter, the complaint filed against OP No.1 is liable to be dismissed.

6.                In view of the aforesaid discussion, we dismiss the present complaint against OP No.1 and allow the same against OPs No.2 to 4. They are directed in the following manner:-

1. To settle the claim of the complainant as per the surveyor report on receipt of the requisite documents from the complainant. The amount payable shall carry interest @7% p.a. w.e.f 11.01.2017, the date on which claim of the complainant was closed till its realization.

 

2. To pay Rs.5,000/- as compensation for mental agony and physical harassment suffered by the complainant.

 

3. To pay Rs.3,000/- as litigation expenses.

The OPs No.2 to 4 are further directed to comply with the order within the period of 30 days from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order, failing which the amount mentioned at serial No.(i) shall carry penal interest @ 9% per annum instead of @ 7% per annum and the amount mentioned at serial no.(ii) & (iii) shall carry interest @ 9%  from the date of filing of the complaint i.e. 02.11.2018, till its realization. Certified copies of this order be supplied to the parties concerned, forthwith, free of cost as permissible under Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the Record Room.

Announced on :11.12.2019

 

 

 

          (Vinod Kumar Sharma)            (Ruby Sharma)     (Neena Sandhu)

              Member                                  Member             President