Haryana

Karnal

CC/158/2021

Meenu - Complainant(s)

Versus

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

Deepak Sachdeva

16 Nov 2022

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KARNAL.

 

                                                        Complaint No. 158 of 2021

                                                        Date of instt.15.03.2021

                                                        Date of Decision:16.11.2022

 

Meenu wife of Shri Sanjay Bangar, resident of Kothi no.2, District Jail Colony, Jagadhari District Yamuna Nagar, now resident of District Jail Colony, Karnal, age 40 years, Aadhar card no.4457 3724 0595.

 

                                               …….Complainant.

                                              Versus

 

1.     Iffco-Tokio General Insurance Co. Ltd. through its Manager, Division Office, Sector-12, Karnal.

 

2.     Iffco Tokio General Insurance Co. Ltd. through its Manager Registered office: Iffco Sadan, C1 District Centre, Saket, New Delhi-110017.

 

                                                                      …..Opposite Parties.

 

Complaint Under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

 

Before   Sh. Jaswant Singh……President.       

      Sh. Vineet Kaushik…….Member

      Dr. Rekha Chaudhary……Member

          

 Argued by: Sh. Deepak Sachdeva, counsel for the complainant.

                    Shri Mohit Goyal, counsel for the opposite parties.

 

                    (Jaswant Singh President)

ORDER:   

                

                The complainant has filed the present complaint Under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the opposite parties (hereinafter referred to as ‘OPs’) on the averments that complainant got insured his car bearing registration no.HR-02-AA-6051 from the OPs, vide insurance policy no.1-18309061 P400 policy #:MA463756, valid from 25.09.2019 to 24.09.2020 and insured declared value (IDV) of the car was Rs.3,07,800/-. On 17.07.2020 the said car met with an accident and in this regard DDR has been registered in Police Station Assandh, District Karnal. The intimation in this regard was also sent to the OPs within time and submitted all the relevant documents. After the accident, the vehicle of the complainant was shifted to Velocity Automotives (P) Ltd. G. T. Road, Ambala City and informed the matter to the insurance company and paid Rs.89679/-. Thereafter, complainant visited the office of OPs so many times and requested the OPs to settle the claim but OPs did not pay any heed to the request of complainant and lastly refused to release the claim, vide email dated 28.07.2020. In this way there is deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs. Hence this complaint.

2.             On notice, OPs appeared and filed its written version raising preliminary objections with regard to maintainability; cause of action and concealment of true and material facts. On merits, it is pleaded that on receipt of intimation regarding the accident of the car in question, OPs appointed an IRDA approved surveyor and loss assessor Shri Neeraj Chhatwal to assess the loss to the damaged vehicle. The surveyor inspected the damaged vehicle and submitted his report dated 28.10.2020 to the insurance company. The claim amount of Rs.38,323/-as assessed by the surveyor has also been disbursed to the complainant’s bank account through NEFT dated 31.10.2020. The complainant intentionally and deliberately not disclosed the said facts to this Commission. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the OPs. The other allegations made in the complaint have been denied by the OPs and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

3.             Parties then led their respective evidence.

4.             Learned counsel for the complainant has tendered into evidence affidavit of complainant Ex.C1, copy of DDR Ex.C2, copy of Aadhar card of complainant Ex.C3, copy of estimate cost Ex.C4, copy of registration certificate Ex.C5, copy of estimate cost Ex.C6, copy of email Ex.C7, copy of insurance policy Ex.C8, copy of receipts Ex.C9 to Ex.C11, copy of tax invoice Ex.C12 and closed the evidence on 20.01.2022 by suffering separate statement.

5.             On the other hand, learned counsel for the OPs has tendered into evidence affidavit of Devendra Kumar, General Manager Ex.OPW1/A, affidavit of Neeraj Chhatwal, Surveyor and Loss Assessor Ex.OPW2/A, copy of surveyor report Ex.O1, copy of insurance policy Ex.O2 and closed the evidence on 26.05.2022 by suffering separate statement.

6.             We have heard the learned counsel of the parties and perused the case file carefully and have also gone through the evidence led by the parties.

7.             Learned counsel for complainant, while reiterating the contents of the complaint, has vehemently argued that on 25.09.2019 complainant got her car insured with the OPs and insured declared value (IDV) of the car was Rs.3,07,800/-. On 17.07.2020 the said car met with an accident and in this regard DDR was registered in Police Station Assandh, District Karnal. The intimation in this regard was also sent to the OPs within time and submitted all the relevant documents. After the accident, the vehicle of the complainant was shifted to Velocity Automotives (P) Ltd. G. T. Road, Ambala City and informed the matter to the insurance company and complainant paid Rs.89679/- to the said workshop. Thereafter, complainant visited the office of OPs so many times and requested the OPs to settle the claim but OPs did not pay the claim and refused to release the claim and lastly prayed for allowing the complaint.

8.             Per contra, learned counsel for OPs, while reiterating the contents of written version, has vehemently argued that on receipt of intimation regarding the accident of the car in question, OPs appointed an IRDA approved surveyor and loss assessor Shri Neeraj Chhatwal to assess the loss to the damaged vehicle. The surveyor has assessed the loss to the tune of Rs.38,323/-which has already also been disbursed to the complainant’s bank account through NEFT dated 31.10.2020 and lastly prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

9.             We have duly considered the rival contentions of the parties.

10.           Admittedly, the vehicle in question met with an accident during the subsistence of the insurance policy.

11.           As per the survey report Ex.O1 dated 28.10.2020, the vehicle of the complainant got surveyed by the surveyor of the OPs. The surveyor of the OPs has assessed the total loss for the tune of Rs.54,656/- and net loss has been assessed to the tune of Rs.38,323/-only.  OPs have taken a plea that an amount of Rs.38,323/- has been disbursed to the complainant’s bank account through NEFT dated 31.10.2020. This fact has been denied by the complainant. The onus to prove its version lies upon the OPs but OPs have miserably failed to prove the same by leading any cogent and convincing evidence.    Furthermore, on perusal of the surveyor report, the surveyor of the OPs has not justified the deduction of Rs.16,399/-. Such act is totally arbitrarily and unjustified. The said deduction is based on presumption and assumption even not supported by any documentary evidence. The surveyor’s report in this regard is thus arbitrary, unjustified, biased, based on presumptions and assumptions and it cannot be the last word for the determination of actual loss. In this regard, we are also fortified from the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in case titled as New India Assurance Company Limited vs. Pradeep Kumar (2009 (6) SCALE, 253) wherein it was held that “The surveyor’s report is not the last and final word. It is not that sacrosanct that it cannot be debarred from, it is not conclusive. The approved surveyor’s report may be basis or foundation for settlement of a claim by the insurer in respect of the loss suffered by the insured but surely such report is neither binding upon the insurer nor insured.” This proposition of law was followed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Sikka Papers Limited vs. National Insurance Company Ltd. & Ors. (III (2009) CPJ 90 (SC). The Hon’ble Chhatisgarh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Raipur in case titled as Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. & Anr. Versus Pukhraj Bothra, IV (2004) CPJ 615 has held that “it is true that normally the estimate of surveyor regarding loss has to be given due consideration but it cannot be said to be the last word for determination of actual loss”. The above said authorities are fully applicable to the facts and circumstances of the present case. In the present case, we are also of the considered opinion that the surveyor has assessed the loss for favouring the OPs and therefore same cannot be given more weightage.

12.           As per estimate report Ex.C6, estimate cost of loss comes out of Rs.1,37,431/-but the complainant has claimed Rs.89,679/- only. The loss assessed by the surveyor of the OPs is Rs.54,656/-only. Hence, complainant is entitled for Rs.54,656/- alongwith interest, compensation for mental agony and harassment and litigation expenses.

13.           In view of the above discussion, we allow the present complaint and direct the OPs to pay Rs.54,656/- (Rs.fifty four thousand six hundred fifty six only) to the complainant alongwith interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing the present complaint till its realization. We further direct the OPs to pay Rs.15,000/- to the complainant on account of mental agony and harassment suffered by her and Rs.5500/- for the litigation expense. This order shall be complied within 45 days from the receipt of copy of this order. It is made clear if the OPs have already paid Rs.38,323/- to the complainant then said amount be deduced in the awarded amount. The parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced

Dated:16.11.2022

                                                                       

                                                                  President,

                                                     District Consumer Disputes

                                                     Redressal Commission, Karnal.

 

 

 

(Vineet Kaushik)        (Dr. Rekha Chaudhary)

                          Member                      Member

Sushma

Stenographer