Chandigarh

StateCommission

A/134/2019

Surekha Rani - Complainant(s)

Versus

Liberty Videocon General Insurance Company Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Deepak Goyal & Aloka Sharma Adv.

31 Jan 2020

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

U.T., CHANDIGARH

 

 

 

Appeal No.	:	134 of 2019
Date of Institution	:	08.07.2019
Date of Decision	:	31.01.2020

 

Surekha Rani W/o Sh. Navtej Kumar R/o H.No.385/2A, Janta Nagar, Dhuri, District Sangrur.

 

Second Residential address at H.No.8477, Old Sunny Enclave, Kharar, District S.A.S. Nagar, Mohali.

…..Appellant/Complainant.

Versus

Liberty Videocon General  Insurance Company Ltd., Suite No.2, First Floor, SCO 174-175, Sector 9-C, Chandigarh.

…Respondent/Opposite Party.

 

Appeal under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

 

 

BEFORE:   JUSTICE RAJ SHEKHAR ATTRI (RETD.), PRESIDENT.

                MRS. PADMA PANDEY, MEMBER.

                MR. RAJESH K. ARYA, MEMBER.

 

 

Argued by:

 

Sh. Deepak Goyal, Advocate for the appellant.

Sh. Yogesh Gupta, Advocate for the respondent.

 

PER  RAJESH  K.  ARYA, MEMBER

                   This appeal has been filed by the complainant seeking modification of order dated 02.05.2019 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-II, U.T., Chandigarh (in short ‘the Forum’), vide which, consumer complaint bearing No.597 of 2018 filed by him was allowed directing the opposite party to pay Rs.16,836/- as assessed by the Surveyor alongwith interest @9% p.a. from the date of repudiation i.e. 18.09.2018 till its actual realization besides payment of Rs.5,000/- and Rs.5,500/- towards compensation and costs of litigation. The order was to be complied within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which, the amount of compensation and litigation costs awarded were to carry same rate of interest @9% p.a. till actual payment.

2.                The complainant is actually seeking the total amount of Rs.38,695/- i.e. (Rs.16,999.00 + Rs.21,696.00), which she spent on repairs of the damaged vehicle, in question, as per invoices dated 29.06.2018 and 06.07.2018. On behalf of the appellant/complainant, it was argued that the Forum has awarded less amount of Rs.16,836/-, which needs to be enhanced. It was further submitted that the Forum also failed to appreciate the aforesaid bills issued by Maruti Authorized Centre, which transpire that the vehicle, in question, needed repair of Rear Bumper, Wind Shield, both Fenders etc. which were damaged in the accident. It was further submitted that the Forum also failed to appreciate that in claim form (Annexure OP-1), the respondent/opposite party made overwriting in the date and put the date as per its own convenience with a motive of not paying the insurance claim.

3.                Though no cross appeal has been filed by the respondent/opposite party to challenge the order of Forum, yet it was argued on behalf of the respondent/opposite party that the Forum without appreciating the facts and documents on record, wrongly allowed the complaint and as such, no case is made out for enhancement of compensation etc.

4.                We have heard the Counsel for the parties and have gone through the impugned order passed by the Forum and evidence and record of the case.

5.                The argument raised by the Counsel for the appellant/ complainant that the respondent/opposite party made overwriting in the date in claim form (Annexure OP-1) and put the date as per its own convenience with a motive of not paying the insurance claim has already been dealt with by the Forum in Para 5 of its order. In the absence of any reliable and convincing evidence, the Forum has rightly rejected the contention of the opposite party that the damages under the claim do not coincide with the cause and the nature of loss as mentioned in the claim form and the damages were older than the date of loss mentioned therein. Rejection of claim by the opposite party vide repudiation letter dated 18.09.2019 has been rightly held to be unjustified and illegal by the Forum.

6.                As regards the enhancement sought by the appellant/complainant, over and above, the awarded amount of Rs.16,836/-, to the extent of Rs.38,695/- i.e. (Rs.16,999.00 + Rs.21,696.00), which she spent on repairs of the damaged vehicle, in question, as per invoices dated 29.06.2018 and 06.07.2018 is concerned, it may be stated here that the Forum has rightly relied upon the motor preliminary assessment report of the Surveyor/Claim Assessor deputed by the opposite party, who after assessment of the damages and applying the due depreciation and compulsory excess, as per terms and conditions, of the Insurance Policy, assessed the loss to the tune of Rs.16,836/- and submitted its assessment report dated 09.07.2018 (Annexure OP-2) to the Insurance Company.

7.                In our considered opinion, the Forum has rightly ordered the respondent/opposite party to pay Rs.16,836/- as assessed by the Surveyor alongwith interest @9% p.a. from the date of repudiation i.e. 18.09.2018 till its actual realization. It also rightly awarded amounts of Rs.5,000/- and Rs.5,500/- towards compensation and costs of litigation respectively, which in our considered opinion, are just and adequate. As such, no case is made out for enhancement of relief awarded by the Forum vide the impugned order and the present appeal seeking enhancement deserves to be dismissed.

8.                 For the reasons recorded above, we concur with the findings given by the Forum in its judgment and are of the opinion that the order passed by the Forum, being based on the correct appreciation of evidence and law, on the point, does not suffer from any illegality or perversity.   

9.                For the reasons recorded above, the appeal filed by the appellant/complainant for enhancement is dismissed with no order as to costs. The impugned order dated 02.05.2019 passed by District Forum-II, U.T., Chandigarh in Consumer Complaint bearing No.597 of 2018 is upheld.

10.              Certified copies of this order, be sent to the parties, free of charge.

11.              The file be consigned to Record Room, after completion.

Pronounced.

31.01.2020.

[RAJ SHEKHAR ATTRI]

PRESIDENT

 

 

(PADMA PANDEY)

        MEMBER

 

 

(RAJESH  K. ARYA)

MEMBER

Ad