Haryana

Karnal

490/2012

Roshni W/o Kuldeep Kumar, Arjoo D/o Kuldeep Kumar, Rajat S/o Kuldeep Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

Iffco -Tokio General Insurance Company., Iffco- Tokio General Insurance Company - Opp.Party(s)

Sudhakar Mittal

28 Sep 2015

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL  FORUM KARNAL.

 

                                                          Complaint No.490 of 2012

                                                          Date of instt.9.10.2012

                                                          Date of decision: 7.10.2015

 

1.Roshni w/o late Shri Kuldeep Kumar aged 38 years,

2.Arjoo d/o late Sh.Kuldeep Kumar aged about 16 years

3.Rajat son of late Sh.Kuldeep Kumar aged about 13 years,  all residents  of house no.55/9, Ram Nagar, Karnal at present residing at House no.271, Prem Nagar, Karnal.

                                                                  ……..Complainants.

                   Vs.

 

1.Iffco Tokio GIC Ltd. having its office at 4^th & 5^th floor Iffco Tower, Plot no.3, Sector- 29, Gurgaon, Haryana 122001.

2.Iffco Tokio GIC Ltd. having one of its offices situated at Anmol Morots near Namaste Chowk, Karnal through its Manager/Authorized signatory.

                                                                  …..Opposite Parties.

 

                                      Complaint u/s 12 of the Consumer

                                      Protection Act.

 

Before          Sh.K.C.Sharma  ……..President.

                   Smt.Shashi Sharma……Member.

                   Sh.Anil Sharma………….Member.

 

 

 

Present:-      Sh.Sudhakar Mittal  Advocate for the complainant.

                   Sh.Y.P.Arora  Advocate for the Ops.

ORDER

 

                        This complaint  has been  filed by the complainant  u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act (herein after referred to as the Act)  on the averments  that Kuldeep Singh son of Godha Ram husband of complainant no.1 and father of complainants no.2 and 3 was, the registered owner of motor cycle bearing registration No. HR-05W-7576 and the said motor cycle was insured with the Opposite Parties ( in short Ops)  under comprehensive insurance policy, vide cover note  bearing No.71559439 for the  period of 18.2.2011 to 17.2.2012. As per  the said policy ,driver and owner of the  vehicle were also  covered under the accidental coverage risk for a sum of Rs..1.00 lac.  On 21.2.2011 when said Kuldeep Singh were also driving the said motor cycle  an accident took  place when a car hit the motor cycle.  Kuldeep Singh sustained injuries in the said accident  and ultimately succumbed to the injuries in PGI, Chandigarh on 22.02.2011. First Information Report  no.138 dated 22.2.2011 was  registered regarding the said accident at Police Station, Civil Lines, Karnal.. After the death of deceased Kuldeep Singh, the complainants lodged the claim alongwith the required documents with the Ops, but the Ops have failed to pay the claim amount to the complainant which amounted to deficiency in services on the part of the Ops.

 

2.                On notice, the Ops appeared  and filed written statement controverting the claim of the complainants. Objections have been raised that complaint is beyond the scope of definition of complaint; that this Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain and decide the complaint; that complainants have no locus standi to file the present complaint; that complainants are estopped by their own acts and conduct from filing the present complaint and that complicated questions  of facts and law are involved in the present complaint  and as such the same can only be decided by the Civil Court.

 

                   On merits, issuance of the insurance policy and death of the deceased Kuldeep Singh has not been denied by the Ops. It has been submitted  that the complainants neither lodged any claim  nor submitted any document with the Ops, therefore, the question of deciding the claim in respect of Death of deceased Kuldeep Singh could  not arises at all. The other allegations  made in the complaint have been denied.

3.                In the evidence of the complainants, affidavit of Smt. Smt.Roshni   Ex.CW1/A and documents Ex. C1 toEx.C5 have been tendered.

4.                On the other hand, in the evidence of Ops affidavit of Pallavi Roy, Vice President has been tendered.

 

3.                We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the case file very carefully.

 

4.                After going through the evidence on the file and circumstances of the case, it emerges that the complainants have not produced any evidence on the file to show that the complainants ever informed the Ops or lodged claim with the OPs regarding the death of deceased Kuldeep Singh.  In such circumstances, it has to be held that in the absence of lodging of any claim no deficiency in service has taken place on the part of the OPs and as such no cause of action accrued in favour of the complainants and thus the present complaint is pre-mature.

 

5.                Therefore, in view of the above discussion, the present complaint is dismissed as pre-mature. However, the complainants would be at liberty to lodge claim with the Ops regarding death of Kuldeep Singh and thereafter the  Ops shall settle the claim of the complainants within a period of sixty days. The parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

 

Announced

07.10.2015                                                           (K.C.Sharma )

                                                                            President,

District Consumer Disputes  

Redressal Forum, Karnal.

 

(Anil Sharma)                   (Smt.Shashi Sharma)

Member.                                    Member

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Present:-      Sh.Sudhakar Mittal  Advocate for the complainant.

                   Sh.Y.P.Arora  Advocate for the Ops.

 

                   Arguments heard. Vide our separate order of the even date, the present complaint has been dismissed. The parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

 

 

Announced

07.10.2015                                                           (K.C.Sharma )

                                                                            President,

District Consumer Disputes  

Redressal Forum, Karnal.

 

(Anil Sharma)                   (Smt.Shashi Sharma)

Member.                                    Member