District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission ,Faridabad.
Consumer Complaint No.25/2022.
Date of Institution: 11.01.2022.
Date of Order: 18.10.2022.
Neeraj Singh Tewatia S/o Sh. Hari Kishan R/o MCF-189, Sanjay colony, 23/6, Mathura Road, Opposite JCB, company Ballabgarh, Faridabad, Haryana Pin Code -121004, mobile No. 7872509918.
…….Complainant……..
Versus
1. ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd., ICICI Lombard House 414, P Basu Marg, Near Siddhivinayak Temple, Prabhadevi, Mumbai – 400 025.
2. ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd., First floor, SCO-17, Sector-16, Faridabad, Haryana – 121002.
…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. N.K.Chandel, counsel for the complainant.
Sh. Vikas Bhadana, counsel for opposite party.
ORDER:
The facts in brief of the complaint are that the complainant had purchased a ICICI Lombard General Insurance policy No. 3001/W-107124892/00/000 dated 01.07.2020 to 30.07.201 from the NoticeeNO.1 & 2 for Wagon R Vehicle No. HR29AR2931. His client had informed and raised a claim to ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd. Through the service center Vipul Motors Private Limited regarding the damage of the Bumper and Front Car glass dated 28.04.2021. On behalf of his client claimed raised by service center Vipul Motors Private Limited ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd. Had issue dthe ICICI Lom NO. 2021051103169, Claim NO. MOT 10995241. On behalf of his client service center raised a claim for bumper and front car glass from which only bumper claim had been settled and damage of front car glass had been rejected. His client had mailed him lot of mails but no satisfactory answer had been received from ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd., His client had also done complaint to Consumer Affairs Department IRDA Nanakramguda, Gachibowli, Hyderabad and Token NO. 07.21.002691 had been raised from IRDA. His client had been harassed 25 days approx. and after that his client had picked his Wagon R car HR-29AR-2931 from service center without replacement of front car glass. His client had continuously followed him through emails several times regarding his claimed of damaged front glass mirror but no action had been taken regarding the replacement of front glass mirror. Then, the complainant called the executive of the opposite party several times but till date the problem had not been resolved and the complainant was just given false assurances by the officials of the opposite parties. The aforesaid act of opposite parties amounts to deficiency of service and hence the complaint. The complainant has prayed for directions to the opposite parties to:
a) resolve the grievance of his client to change the front glass mirror in the interest of justice.
b) pay Rs. 1,00,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment .
c) pay Rs. 30,000 /-as litigation expenses.
2. Opposite parties put in appearance through counsel and filed written statement wherein Opposite parties refuted claim of the complainant and submitted that respondent no. 1 herein was a General Insurance Company and it had issued a private car insurance policy No. 3001/174627434/00/001 for the vehicle (i.e. Maruti Wagon R) of the complainant bearing no. HR-29-AR-2931. The said policy was valid for the period from 01.07.2020 to 30.06.2021 and the liability of respondents for own damage covered for the period of one year and strictly as per the terms and conditions of the policy. During the tenure of the said policy, the insured lodged a claim with the insurance company. Accordingly, a claim NO. MOT10995241 issued on dated 28.04.2021 against the said accidental damage. After considering the claim, the payment of the bill NO. 23/B1/21000279 raised by the service centre Vipul motors Faridabad of Rs.3943/- was released on dated 11.05.2021 by the answering opposite party to the said garage. Opposite parties denied rest of the allegations leveled in the complaint and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
3. The parties led evidence in support of their respective versions.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record on the file.
5. In this case the complaint was filed by the complainant against opposite parties–ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd. with the prayer to: a) resolve the grievance of his client to change the front glass mirror in the interest of justice. b) pay Rs. 1,00,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment . c) pay Rs. 30,000 /-as litigation expenses.
To establish his case the complainant has led in his evidence, Ex.CW1/A – affidavit of Neeraj Singh Tewatia son of Shri hari Kishan age about 38 years, resident of R/o MCF-189, Sanjay Colony, 23/6, Mathura Road, Opposite JCB, Company Ballabgarh, Faridabad, Ex.C-1 – legal notice,, Ex.C-2 – postal receipt,, Ex.C-3 – insurance policy, Ex.C-4 – details of dated 28.04.2021, Ex.C-5 – letter dated May 01,2021,, Ex.C-6 – job card retail- tax invoice, Ex.C-7 – email, Ex.C-8 – email,
On the other hand counsel for the opposite parties strongly agitated
and opposed. As per the evidence of the opposite parties Ex.RW1/A – Affidavit of Rohan Mishra, Manager Legal of the opposite party insurance company having its one of the offices at 4th floor, Red Fort Capital, Parsvnathj, Bhai Veer Singh Marg, Gole Market, New Delhi, Ex.R-1 – insurance policy., Ex.R-2 – job card retail.
6. In this case, the main issue was of Front glass mirror. To prove his case, the complainant has led in his evidence Ex.C1 to C8 and in rebuttal counsel for the opposite parties have tendered only insurance policy. After going through the communications through emails this is an admitted that that front glass morror was also damaged which was not conveyed by the dealer i.e Vipul Motors. It was also in the knowledge of the surveyor that the front glass mirror was damaged when the survey was done by the deputed surveyor. But they never make payment of the front glass mirror to the dealer. During the course of arguments, counsel for opposite parties admitted this fact but in rebuttal opposite party has not led any evidence As per the correspondence going through emails between the parties, issue goes in favour of the complainant.
7. Keeping in view of the above, the Commission is of the opinion that the complaint is allowed with the direction to opposite parties to pay the front glass mirror amount to the complainant. The opposite parties are also directed to pay Rs.1100/- as compensation on account of mental tension, agony and harassment alongwith Rs.1100/- as litigation expenses to the complainant. Opposite parties are at liberty to recover the above said amount form the Vipul Motors. Compliance of this order be made within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of order. Copy of this order be given to the parties concerned free of costs and file be consigned to record room.
Announced on: 18.10.2022 (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.
