DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II U.T. CHANDIGARH Complaint Case No.: 270 of 2010 Date of Inst: 05.05.2010 Date of Decision: 09.03.2011 Suresh Kumar son of Sh.Satpal Verma r/o VPO Khatauli, District Panchkula. ---Complainant V E R S U S IFFCO Tokio General Insurance Co. Ltd., Plot 2-B and C, Sector 28-A, Madhya Marg, Chandigarh-160002 through its Branch Manager. ---Opposite Party QUORUM SHRI LAKSHMAN SHARMA PRESIDENT SHRI ASHOK RAJ BHANDARI MEMBER SMT.MADHU MUTNEJA MEMBER PRESENT: Sh.R.K.Singla, Adv. for complainant Sh.Bharat Bhushan, Adv. for OP. --- PER LAKSHMAN SHARMA, PRESIDENT Sh.Suresh Kumar has filed this complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 praying therein that OP be directed to :- i) Pay Rs.9042/- towards the repair of the vehicle. ii) Pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- as compensation for mental agony and harassment. iii) Pay Rs.11000/- as cost of complaint. iv) Pay Rs.11000/- as litigation expenses. 2. In brief the case of the complainant is that he got insured his scooter (Bajaj Chetak) bearing No.HR-03-c-8573 with OPs vide insurance cover note No.38235002 against the premium of Rs.553/-. The said insurance policy was valid from 07.01.2009 to 06.01.2010 for insured declared value of Rs.9,000/-. According to the complainant, the said vehicle met with an accident on 22.11.2008. The complainant got recorded the F.I.R. No.250 dated 23.11.2008. On intimation of the claim, the surveyor namely Sh.Shiv Shakti Sharma appointed by the OP inspected the vehicle and the complainant got repaired the vehicle by spending Rs.9042/- vide Bill NO.3080 dated 31.12.2008. Thereafter, the complainant submitted the claim along with requisite documents. According to the complainant, the claim has been repudiated vide letter dated 27.07.2009 on the ground that the driving licence submitted by him was in the name of Smt.Giano Devi. Ultimately, the complainant approached the Licensing Authority, Panchkula who issued the report dated 15.09.2009 stating that the driving licence bearing NO.2773 dated 29.08.1997 was issued in the name of the complainant and the same was valid upto 27.10.2018. it has been pleaded by the complainant that the claim has been repudiated despite the fact that he was holding a valid and effective driving licence on the date of accident. So, it amounts to deficiency in service. In these circumstances, the present complaint was filed seeking the reliefs mentioned above. 3. In the reply filed by OP, it has been admitted that the vehicle of the complainant was insured for IDV of Rs.9000/- under insurance policy which was valid from 07.01.2009 to 06.01.2010. It has been pleaded that the claim of the complainant was not payable as the driving licence submitted by the complainant was issued in the name of Giano Devi d/o Rattan Lal as per the verification report dated 23.03.2009 of Sh.Sanjeev Sethi, Surveyor(Annexure R-1). It has further been pleaded that the claim of the complainant was rightly repudiated as per the terms and conditions of the insurance policy. In these circumstances, there is no deficiency in service on its part and the complaint deserves dismissal. 4. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the entire record including documents, annexures, affidavits etc. 5. The only question to be determined in this case is that whether the driving licence submitted by the complainant was issued in his name and the same was valid and effective on the date of the accident or not? It has been vehemently argued by the learned counsel for the OP that the driving licence submitted by the complainant was got verified through Sh.Sanjeev Sethi, Surveyor and Loss Assessor and on verification it was found to be issued in the name of one Smt.Giano Devi and not in the name of the complainant. But OP has failed to place on record the affidavit of Sh.Sanjeev Sethi, Surveyor and Loss Assessor who allegedly got verified the driving licence No.2773 from the Licensing Authority, Panchkula on 20.03.2009 in support of his verification report and therefore, no credence can be placed upon the verification report submitted by the surveyor. Moreover, there are some cuttings on the alleged verification report dated 20.03.2009 submitted the Surveyor and Loss Assessor. On the other hand, the complainant has placed on record the verification report dated 15.09.2009 issued by the Licensing Authority, Panchkula which clearly mentions that the driving licence bearing No.2773 was issued in the name of the complainant and the same was valid upto 27.10.2018. The complainant has filed his detailed affidavit dated 03.05.2010 in support of the averments made in the complaint as well as in the verification report dated 15.09.2009. Moreover, when there were two contradictory verification reports of the same authority regarding the same licence it was the duty of the OP to get the reports clarified. Therefore, the verification report dated 15.09.2009 submitted by the complainant is held to be genuine and authentic. In these circumstances, it is proved that the complainant was holding a valid and effective driving licence on the date of accident. It has not been denied that the complainant has incurred Rs.9042/- towards the repairs of the vehicle. As the vehicle was insured for IDV of Rs.9,000/- and therefore, the complainant is entitled to Rs.9,000/- only. 6. In view of the foregoing findings, this complaint is allowed with a direction to OP to pay a sum of Rs.9000/- towards the repair of the vehicle in question along with a sum of Rs.2500/- as compensation for mental agony and harassment. The OP is also directed to pay a sum of Rs.7000/- to the complainant as costs of litigation. 7. This order be complied with by OP within 45 days from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which the OP shall be liable to refund Rs.11,500/- to the complainant along with penal interest @ 18% p.a. from the date of filing of the complaint till its realization besides costs of litigation. 8. Certified copy of this order be communicated to the parties, free of charge. After compliance file be consigned to record room. Announced 09.03.2011 sd/- (LAKSHMAN SHARMA) PRESIDENT cm sd/- (ASHOK RAJ BHANDARI) MEMBER Sd/- (MADHU MUTNEJA) MEMBER
| | MR. A.R BHANDARI, MEMBER | HONABLE MR. LAKSHMAN SHARMA, PRESIDENT | MRS. MADHU MUTNEJA, MEMBER | | 
