Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rohtak.
Complaint No. : 680
Instituted on : 22.11.2021
Decided on : 13.06.2024
Anand Saini s/o Sh. Umrao Saini, aged 36 years, R/o #43, Naharpur village, Sectpr-7, Rohini, Delhi.
……….………….Complainant.
Vs.
- IFFCO-TOKIO General Insurance Company Limited, IFFCO Sadan, C-1. District Centre, Saket, New Delhi-110017.
- Manager, Motor Claims Department, IFFCO TOKIO General Insurance Company Limited, IFFCO Bhawan, 4th Floor, Plot No. 2 B & C. Sector-28A, Madhya Marg, Chandigarh-160002.
...........……Respondents/opposite parties.
COMPLAINT UNDER CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 1986(AMENDED UPTO DATE)
BEFORE: SH.NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT.
DR. TRIPTI PANNU, MEMBER.
DR. VIJENDER SINGH, MEMBER
Present: Sh.Umesh Kumar, Advocate for the complainant.
Sh.Anurag Malik, Advocate for the opposite parties.
ORDER
NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT:
1. Brief facts of the case as per the complainant are that on dated 26.04.2010, he purchased a car having Model TEANA bearing Registration No.DL-3CBM/6444. On dated 25.09.2018, said vehicle was insured with respondents vide Policy No. M3254555 and the period of insurance was from 01.10.2018 to midnight on 30.09.2019, in which IDV of said car has been shown as Rs.957240/-. On dated 20.05.2019, complainant was coming at the house of his sister at Rohtak and when he reached near Kheri Sadh Bridge, then suddenly, a cow came in front of his car, and when he applied break then one vehicle hit the car of petitioner from back side, and due to that hit, car of the complainant uncontrolled and hit against one truck which was parked at left side and due to aforesaid reasons, car of the complainant was damaged badly. Complainant also got recorded DD No. 23 dated 20.05.2019 at P.P.Kharawar, District Rohtak. The complainant informed the insurance Company regarding said accident and Claim No. 37987908 was allotted to the petitioner. Thereafter, Mr. Sunny Goel, Surveyor inspected the vehicle at the workshop of M/s BA Motors, Rohtak and also took the photographs of the damaged vehicle, and vide letter dated 06.06.2019 requested the complainant to submit the papers mentioned in the letter. Accordingly the complainant supplied the required information to him. Estimate of Rs.15,33,356/- was prepared by M/s BA Motors Pvt. Ltd., Rohtak, which was higher than IDV of the accidental car. Thereafter, Mr. Vikash Kumar & Associates was appointed as Investigator and he issued letter dated 30.06.2019 & 21.11.2019 requesting the complainant to supply information to initiate the process of investigation, and accordingly, petitioner supplied the same personally when officials of insurance company had come to inspect the vehicle. But, insurance company vide its letter dated 18.03.2020 intimated the complainant that his claim has been closed "due to non compliance of documents". Thereafter, on dated 09.05.2020, petitioner again sent all the required documents through email to the insurance company, and also made complaint dated 17.08.2020 through email as well as through Twitter to the Insurance Company, and also requested to supply all the papers relating to the claim. But the opposite party vide email dated 07.09.2021, rejected the claim of the complainant. That the complainant requested many times to the respondents to pass claim, but in vain. Hence, this complaint and it is prayed that opposite parties may kindly be directed to pay Rs. 9,57,240/-i.e. IDV of vehicle alongwith interest, Rs.20,000/- as mental harassment and Rs. 20,000/- as litigation expenses to the complainant.
2. After registration of complaint, notices were issued to the opposite parties. Opposite parties filed their written statement submitting therein that on receipt of belated intimation of the loss on 23.05.2019, the respondent Company immediately appointed Sh. Sunny Goel, Surveyor and loss assessor. As per his report, some claim documents were required but the insured has not responded. Registered letters were sent to the insured for procuring all these documents by the surveyor as mentioned in letter dated 06/06/2019 but insured/complainant has opted not to respond to the said surveyor. Details of required documents/information is as under-
- DMS estimates with exact part and rate.
- Previous policy copy.
- Verified copy of R/C and D/L.
- Cancelled Cheque with printed name for NEFT for claim payment, if any.
- Loan statement for closer.
- Please confirm how many occupants were in the car at the time of accident?
- Complete details of injuries if to anybody.
- Spot photo if any.
The surveyor submitted his independent report in the office of opposite parties. Vikas Kumar & Associates was also deputed by the opposite parties to investigate the matter. During investigation, they tried to contact the complainant telephonically and also visited the address mentioned in the policy. But in any case he was not able to contact to the insured. Thereafter, for completion of documents they wrote a letter dated 30/06/2019, reminder dated 21/11/2019 but they did not receive any response from the complainant’s side. Lastly, due to non-cooperative behaviour of the complainant, the investigator was left with no other option but to close the file without any investigations and return the papers to the O.P.s vide report dated 20/02/2020. The claim of complainant was thus closed due to non compliance of documents and a registered letter dated 18/03/2020 was sent in this regard. Hence, there is no deficiency in service on the part of opposite party. All the other contents of the complaint were stated to be wrong and denied and opposite party prayed for dismissal of complaint with cost.
3. Ld. counsel for the complainant in his evidence has tendered affidavit Ex.CW1/A, documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C13 and has closed his evidence on dated 03.08.2022. On the other hand, Ld. counsel for the opposite parties has tendered affidavit Ex.RW1/A, Ex.RW2/A, documents Ex.R1 to Ex.R7 and closed his evidence on dated 20.07.2023.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the material aspects of the case very carefully.
5. In the present case the respondent insurance company took two objections in his written statement that complainant has not completed the required formalities and has not submitted the clarifications which were required for the settlement of the claim of the complainant. As per the written statement opposite party required some documents from the complainant i.e. DMS estimates with exact part and rate, Previous policy copy, Verified copy of R/C and D/L, Cancelled Cheque with printed name for NEFT for claim payment, if any. Loan statement for closer, Please confirm how many occupants were in the car at the time of accident, complete details of injuries if to anybody, Spot photo if any etc. It has been further submitted that the intimation regarding the damage has been given to the insurance company belatedly. As per the documents placed on record by the complainant the vehicle was met with an accident on 20.05.2019 and the DDR No.23 dated 20.05.2019 was got registered in P.P.Kharawar, District Rohtak on the statement of complainant. We have also perused the documents placed on record by the insurance company. The report of surveyor Sh. Sunny Goel as Ex.R1, letter dated 06.06.2019 by the surveyor Sh. Sunny Goel to the complainant Ex.R2, letter dated 20.02.2020 by Vikas Kumar and Associates to the Manager Claim department Iffco Tokio as Ex.R3, letter dated 30.06.2019 by the insurance company to the complainant as Ex.R4, letter dated 21.11.2019 & letter dated 18.03.2020 written by the insurance company to the complainant Ex.R6 & R7 respectively. We have minutely perused the first letter issued by the surveyor Sh. Sunny Goel on 06.06.2019 to the complainant in which some documents and information has been sought from the complainant. We have also perused the surveyor report, the date of loss is mentioned upon page no.4, third line from the bottom of this report as 08.04.2019 and intimation to the insurance company as 11.05.2019 whereas the accident took place on 20.05.2019 and the date of intimation was 23.05.2019. The date and time of survey is mentioned in the survey report as 30.05.2019 at 3.00 P.M. Hence a wrong date is mentioned by the surveyor in his report. It is also observed that the survey report has been submitted by the surveyor on 24.12.2021 i.e. after a delay of 2 years and 7 months and in this report, the surveyor has specifically given the information regarding registration certificate, Driving licence, date of accident, estimate, detail of DDR etc. The surveyor himself verified the registration certificate and driving licence of the complainant online. In letter dated 06.06.2019 Ex.R2, above mentioned documents have been demanded by the surveyor from the complainant. In this complaint, the complainant’s version is that he has already submitted all the required documents with the insurance company on 09.05.2020 through email and to prove this fact he has placed on record copy of email as Ex.C11. The perusal of this email itself shows that all the required documents have already been attached by the complainant with this email. Here after receiving these documents, the surveyor submitted his report after more than 2½ years on 24.12.2021. We are surprised to see that if the complainant has not submitted these documents with the surveyor or the insurance company then from where the surveyor collected the information which has been mentioned in survey report. The estimate has been described. All the other particulars have been mentioned in this report. The surveyor has specifically mentioned that “No NCB in the said case”, “no delay in intimation”, and no ‘pre-inspection report” in said case. Meaning thereby the complainant has submitted all the required documents and clarification or information with the insurance company. We have also observed that surveyor has demanded previous policy copy whereas the insurance company placed on record a copy of policy issued by the respondent as Ex.R7 and on the second page of this policy, previous policy detail has already been mentioned. So necessary documents which were demanded by the insurance company were already in their possession and the demand of these documents was only to delay the claim of the complainant. As per our observation the surveyor has submitted investigation report belatedly i.e. after delay of more than 2 years and 7 months due to which claim was not settled. Hence there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite party and opposite party is liable to pay the IDV of vehicle after deducting the 15% amount as salvage value i.e. to pay Rs.813654/-(Rs.957240/- less 15%)
6. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case we hereby allow the complaint and direct the opposite party to pay Rs.813654/-(Rupees eight lac thirteen thousand six hundred and fifty four only) alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing the present complaint i.e. 22.11.2021 till its realisation and also to pay a sum of Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand only) on account of deficiency in service and Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand only) as litigation expenses to the complainant within one month from the date of decision. However, complainant is directed to move an application to the Registration Authority for cancellation of R.C. and not to ply the vehicle on road. Complainant is also directed to sale the alleged vehicle in scrap.
7. Copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced in open court:
13.06.2024.
................................................
Nagender Singh Kadian, President
………………………………..
Tripti Pannu, Member.
………………………………..
Vijender Singh, Member.
