Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Rohtak.

                                                          Complaint No. : 201.

                                                          Instituted on     : 30.03.2017.

                                                          Decided on       : 15.11.2018.

Ajit Singh Singhal, Age 55 years s/o Sh. Ram Singh Singhal, R/o Village Ballam, Tehsil and District Rohtak, Mb. No.9992159594.

                                                                    ………..Complainant.

                             Vs.

1. D.S.Budhwar through Budhwar Automobile Sonepat Stand, Rohtak, Agent IFFCO TOKIO General Insurance Co. Ltd. Iffco House 3^rd  Floor, 34, Nehru Palace, New Delhi.
2. IFFCO TOKIO General Insurance Co. Ltd., Iffco House, 3^rd Floor,-34 Nerhu Place, New Delhi. 

……….Opposite parties.

          COMPLAINT U/S 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986.

BEFORE:  SH.NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT.

                   SH. VED PAL, MEMBER.

                   SMT. SAROJ BALA BOHRA, MEMBER.

Present:       Sh.M.S.Verma, Advocate for the complainant.

                   Sh.R.K.Behl, Advocate for the opposite party No.2.

                   Opposite party No.1 exparte.

                                      ORDER

NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT:

1.                          Brief facts of the case are that complainant insured his vehicle bearing no.HR-12Y/7869 from the agent of opposite party No.1. That the alleged Activa had met with an accident on 15.01.2016 and the OP was informed immediately and the Activa was got repaired from Shivam Motors Bhiwani Chungi, Kalanaur and the complainant had spent an amount of Rs.4980/-. That a legal notice was also served upon the Ops  but the claim has not been paid till date. That the claim number filed by the complainant is 36492194 and all the required documents were submitted by the complainant but payment has not been made by the opposite parties. Hence this  complaint and the complainant has prayed for directing the opposite parties to pay the claim of Rs.4980/- alongwith interest, compensation and litigation expenses to the complainant as explained in relief clause.   

2.                          After registration of complaint, notice was issued to the opposite parties. Opposite party No.1 did not appear despite service and as such was proceeded against exparte vide order dated 15.05.2017 of this Forum. Opposite party No.2 in its reply has submitted that complainant has not submitted the original repair bills, cancelled cheque inspte of reminders by the surveyor Sh. Hemant Kumar, dated 31.01.2016 & 16.02.2016 as well as letter dated 06.06.2016 of the company. That the insured has not submitted the bills hence the opposite party company has rightly no claim the case file due to non-submission of the documents. That there is no deficiency in service on the part of OPs and dismissal of complaint has been sought.

3.                          Ld. counsel for the complainant has tendered affidavit Ex.PW1/A, documents Ex.P1 to Ex.P4 and closed his evidence.  On the other hand, ld. counsel for OP No.2 has tendered affidavit Ex.RW1/A, documents Ex.R1 to Ex.R4  and closed his evidence.

4.                          We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through material aspects of the case very carefully.

5.                          After going through the file and hearing the parties it is observed that the claim of the complainant has not been settled by the opposite party on the ground that original repair bills, cancelled cheque and other information has not been provided by the complainant to the respondent or to the surveyor Sh. Hemant Kumar Sharma. A letter was issue by insurance company on dated 06.06.2016 which is Ex.R1 and other letters are written by the surveyor which are Ex.R3 and Ex.R4. On the other hand, as per the complainant he had already deposited all the relevant documents as demanded by the respondent company. The complainant also gave a legal notice through his counsel Sh.M.S.Verma on dated 30.07.2016 and through this notice it has been submitted that repair bill and other documents had already been submitted to the insurance company. After perusal of all the documents, we came to the conclusion that the documents required by the opposite party have already been submitted by the complainant. Hence the act of opposite parties of non-settlement of claim is illegal and amounts to deficiency in service. 

6.                          In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, complaint is allowed and we hereby direct the opposite party No.2  to pay a sum of Rs.4980/- (Rupees four thousand nine hundred eighty only) alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing the present complaint i.e. 30.03.2017 till its realization and shall also pay a sum of Rs.3000/-(Rupees three thousand only) as compensation on account of deficiency in service and litigation expenses to the complainant within one month from the date of decision.  

7.                          Copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of costs.

8.                          File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced in open court:

15.11.2018.

                                                          ....................................................

                                                          Nagender Singh Kadian, President

                                                          ..........................................

                                                          Ved Pal Hooda, Member.

                                                                        …………………………..

                                                                        Saroj Bala Bohra, Member.