Punjab

Sangrur

CC/188/2015

Bhura Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Iffco Tokio - Opp.Party(s)

Shri Jagtar singh

03 Sep 2015

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SANGRUR.

 

       

                                                       

                                                Complaint No.    188

                                                Instituted on:      08.04.2015

                                                Decided on:       03.09.2015

 

 

Bhura Singh son of Shri Ram Rattan Singh, resident of Village Khadial, Tehsil Sunam, District Sangrur.

                                                        …Complainant

                                Versus

Iffco Tokio General Insurance Company Limited, 2^nd Floor, Above Hotel Hot Chop, Kaula Park, Sangrur through its Manager.

                                                        ..Opposite party

 

For the complainant    :       Shri Jagtar Singh , Adv.

For OP                      :       Shri Sumesh Garg, Adv.

 

Quorum:    Sukhpal Singh Gill, President

                K.C.Sharma, Member

                Sarita Garg, Member

 

 

 

Order by : Sukhpal Singh Gill, President.

 

 

1.             Shri Bhura Singh, complainant (referred to as complainant in short) has preferred the present complaint against the opposite party (referred to as OP in short) on the ground that the complainant availed the services of the OP by getting insured a tractor bearing registration number PB-19A-6527 vide policy number 1-30MZT5S, which was valid for the period from 15.9.2014 to 14.09.2015.

 

2.             The case of the complainant is that on 18.12.2014, when the complainant was coming from Patiala to his village on his tractor, a trolla was coming from Sunam side at a very high speed and at that time three/four stray animals came on the road  in front of the trolla and the driver of the trolla to save his trolla from the collusion with the animals, turned the trolla on wrong side and due to which he struck with the tractor in question and the tractor was badly damaged, of which DDR dated 19.12.2014 was lodged with the police. It is further stated that after the accident, the complainant immediately informed the OP and the Op appointed Shri Rajesh Aggarwal, surveyor and loss assessor and thereafter the complainant got repaired the tractor from a private mechanic and spent an amount of Rs.1,50,450/- on the repairs of the tractor, but the OP paid only an amount of Rs.44,250/- to the complainant, which is less from the actual loss suffered by the complainant. The complainant approached the OP so many times for payment of remaining amount of Rs.1,05,200/- along with interest @ 18% per annum from the date of accident till realisation and further claimed compensation and litigation expenses.

 

3.             In reply, legal objections are taken up on the grounds that intricate questions of law and facts are involved in the present complaint which requires voluminous documents and evidence for determination, which is not possible in the summary proceedings and that the complainant has concealed material facts and documents from this Forum as well as the OPs, therefore, the complainant is not entitled to any relief. The complainant has concealed the fact that the Op has already paid the due amount on the basis of survey report i.e. Rs.44,250/- and no other amount is due. It is further averred that the complainant has no locus standi or cause of action to file the present complaint.  On merits, it is stated that the surveyor Shri Rajesh Aggarwal appointed by the OP has assessed the loss at Rs.44,250/- after applying depreciation and other provisions as per the terms and conditions of the policy and IMT.  The vehicle is of manufacturing year 2010 and depreciation has been charged according to the provisions of the policy.  However, any deficiency in service on the part of the OP has been denied.

 

4.             The learned counsel for the complainant has produced Ex.C-1 copy of RC, Ex.C-2 copy of insurance policy, Ex.C-3 copy of DDR dated 19.12.2014, Ex.C-4 to Ex.C-10 copies of bills, Ex.C-11 copy of bank statement,  Ex.C-12 affidavit of the complainant and Ex.C-13 is a copy of email and closed evidence. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the OP has produced Ex.OP/1 affidavit, Ex.OP/2 copy of survey report, Ex.OP-3 copy of policy, Ex.OP-4 copy of claim form and closed evidence.

 

5.             We have carefully perused the complaint, version of the opposite party, evidence produced on the file and also heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties. In our opinion, the complaint merits acceptance, for these reasons.

 

6.             It is an admitted fact that the vehicle of the complainant bearing registration number PB-19A-6527 was comprehensively insured with the OP under policy in question for the period from 15.9.2014 to 14.9.2015, a copy of which on record is Ex.C-2.  Further it is also admitted fact that the vehicle of the complainant met with an accident on 18.12.2014 while the complainant was coming from Patiala to his village on his tractor. It is further an admitted fact that the complainant gave an intimation about the accident of the vehicle in question and on receipt of the intimation, the OP appointed Shri Rajesh Aggarwal, Surveyor  and Loss Assessor, who assessed the loss to the tune of Rs.44,250/- vide his report dated 22.1.2015, a copy of which on record is Ex.OP/2.  But, in the present case, the grievance of the complainant is that though he spent an amount of Rs.1,50,450/- on the repair of the tractor by paying the same vide bills Ex.C-4 to Ex.C-10, but the Op has paid only an amount of Rs.44,250/-.  After carefully perusing the details of the bills as well as the survey report, we find that the surveyor has rightly assessed the loss of the tractor except vide bill Ex.C-6, wherein the complainant has spent an amount of Rs.15,000/- on account of repair of the tractor by paying the same to M/s. Guru Teg Bahadur Tractor Workshop, Sunam, whereas the surveyor has wrongly assessed the amount of Rs.10,500/- only. There is no justification in the survey report that how the surveyor deducted an amount of Rs.4500/- from the above said bill of Rs.15,000/-. In the circumstances, we feel that the OP is deficient in rendering service by illegally deducting an amount of Rs.4500/- from the above said bill of Rs.15,000/- and further are of the considered opinion that ends of justice would be met if the OP is directed to pay further an amount of Rs.4500/- to the complainant.  It is made clear that the OP has already paid an amount of Rs.44,250/- on account of the claim amount on 3.2.2015.

 

7.             The insurance companies are in the habit to take these type of projections to save themselves from paying the insurance claim. The insurance companies are only interested in earning the premiums and find ways and means to decline claims. The above said view was taken by the Hon’ble Justice Ranjit Singh of Punjab and Haryana High Court in case titled as New India Assurance Company Limited versus Smt. Usha Yadav and others 2008(3) R.C.R. 9 Civil) 111.

 

8.             In view of our above discussion, we allow the complaint and direct OP to pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.4500/- along with interest @ 9% per annum from 3.2.2015 (the date of payment of the claim amount) till its realisation.  We further direct the OP to pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.5,000/- in lieu of consolidated amount of compensation and litigation expenses. 

 

9.             This order of ours be complied with within a period of thirty days of its communication. A  copy of this order be issued to the parties free of cost. File be consigned to records.

                Pronounced.

                September 3, 2015.

                                                        (Sukhpal Singh Gill)

                                                           President

 

 

                                                              (K.C.Sharma)

                                                                Member

 

 

                                                                (Sarita Garg)

                                                                    Member