Meghalaya

East Khasi Hills

12/2011

SHRI GREGORY KHARSATI - Complainant(s)

Versus

ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE - Opp.Party(s)

06 Sep 2012

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
EAST KHASI HILLS, SHILLONG
MEGHALAYA
 
Complaint Case No. 12/2011
 
1. SHRI GREGORY KHARSATI
Shillong
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'ABLE MR. Sanjay Goyal PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MRS. Dr C.Massar MEMBER
 HON'ABLE MR. D.R Thangkhiew MEMBER
 
For the Complainant:
For the Opp. Party: S.Jindal, Advocate
ORDER

The brief facts of the case are that the Complainant is a policy holder with the Opposite Party OP, ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd, Shillong Branch in respect of a vehicle and a Certificate Cum Policy No. 3003/54346970/01/000 in respect of the Goods Carrier four wheel truck was issued by the OP under Goods Carrying Vehicle Package Policy which was valid till 02.06.2010 midnight. The said vehicle having Chassis No. 373145MSZ143143, Engine No. 697TC56MsZ155904 and Registration No. ML05 F 5713 was duly registered with the District Transport Office at Shillong. On 18.10.2009 the aforesaid Goods Carrier vehicle met with an accident due to heavy fog and bad weather near Mawkdok Bridge, Sohra Division. The vehicle was totally damaged as per the record of the Motor Vehicle Inspector, East Khasi Hills District, Meghalaya. The Complainant intimated the OP about the accident verbally as well as in writing on several occasions with a request to settle the claim of the Policy No. 3003/54346970/01/000. The OP appointed the Surveyor to inspect the site of the accident and to assess the condition of the insured vehicle however the Complainant was never intimated about the fate of his claim. A police case being G.R Case No.24/10/2009 was registered before the court of the Magistrate First Class, Sohra, East Khasi Hills District who has disposed off the case by making an observation that there was no sufficient ground to proceed with the case against the driver who held a valid driving license. When the OP did not settle the claim for more than a year, the Complainant on 18.11.2010 submitted a representation to the OP together with relevant documents with a request to settle his claim based on the policy document and the sum assured. But the OP failed to respond to the representation. On 16.03.2011 Complainant sent a legal notice to the OP even so the OP did not take any action to settle the claim, hence this case.

 Notice was issued to the OP however the OP has been very irregular in appearing before the Forum. On 29.07.2011 the learned counsel for the OP prayed for time to file show cause and the Forum gave the final chance for the OP to file show cause. On subsequent dates, the OP failed to appear before this Forum and ultimately on 04.05.2012 the Forum decided to proceed with this case ex parte. Learned counsel for the Claimant in his submission mentioned that he has nothing more to say except for what has been stated in the complaint petition.

 The Forum has perused the material facts on record and the following observations were made
1. The policy issued to the Complainant was valid at the time of accident.
2. The vehicle was duly registered with the DTO, East Khasi Hills, Shillong.
3. As a result of accident, the vehicle got damaged as per the report of Motor Vehicle Inspector East Khasi Hills Shillong.
4. The Complainant made genuine efforts to take up the matter of claim with the OP including that of a representation dated 18.11.2010 and pleader notice dated 16.03.2011.
5. There is nothing on record mentioning that the OP had taken steps in response to the claim made by Complainant.
6. The police case being G.R.Case No. 2410 2009 registered at Sohra Police Station, East Khasi Hills District, the Magistrate while disposing off the case made an observation that there is no sufficient ground to proceed the case against the driver as he was driving with the valid driving license and there was nothing to prove about the negligence on his part which could have resulted into accident.

Based on the above observations, this Forum is of the opinion that the accident happened because of the bad weather condition and there is nothing on record to prove negligence on the part of the driver. The OP was given enough opportunities to present their case, however they failed to do so before this Forum. The delay on the part of the OP to settle the claim under a valid policy amounts to negligence and deficiency in service as defined in section 2 g of the Consumer protection Act, 1986.

We therefore direct the OP to pay an amount of Rs 8,61,121/ which is the sum insured under policy to the claimant. The claimant has also prayed for an amount of Rs 5 lakhs as compensation for financial loss. However, in absence of any proof to support his claim, this Forum we are not inclined to award the same. This Forum takes cognisance that the Complainant faced hardship and harassment by the OP by not responding to the complaint made by him. Hence we are inclined to award a sum of Rs 50,000/ as compensation on account of hardships and harassment met by Complainant due to negligence and deficiency in service on the part of the OP.

OP to pay a total sum of Rs 9,11,121/ within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order.

Case disposed off.


 

 
 
[HON'ABLE MR. Sanjay Goyal]
PRESIDENT
 
[HON'BLE MRS. Dr C.Massar]
MEMBER
 
[HON'ABLE MR. D.R Thangkhiew]
MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.