Case No. 93/2023   

IN THE MATTER OF

Smt. Shalini Owner, Firm M/s Shalini Enterprises, 2/53 Vishnu Puri, Aligarh

                                           V/s

1. Manager, M/s ICICI Lombard Insurance Company Ltd. Ist Floor 3/16 A Bhalla Complex Near Devtray Hospital Ramghat Road,  Aligarh
2. Sri Neeraj N. Sharma Service Manager/ Surveyor  M/s ICICI Lombard Insurance Company Ltd. Ist Floor 3/16 A Bhalla Complex Near Devtray Hospital Ramghat Road,  Aligarh
3. M/s ICICI Lombard Insurance Company Ltd. Building No.16, 6^th Floor Office No.601, 602 new link Road Malad West, Mumbai

CORAM

 Present:

1. Shri Hasnain Qureshi, President
2. Shri Alok Upadhayay, Member
3. Smt. Purnima Singh Rajpoot, Member

PRONOUNCED by Shri Hasnain Qureshi, President

JUDGMENT

1. The present complaint has been filed by the complainant before this commission for following reliefs:-

1. Op be directed to pay expenses at the rate Rs. 100 per day for not repairing the vehicle for 52 days.
2. Op be directed to replace the parts of the vehicle as per estimate.
3. Op be directed to pay compensation Rs.20000 for harassment.
4.  Op be directed to pay Rs. 10000 as litigation expenses.

2. Complainant has stated that the vehicle no. UP 81 CW 9534 was insured with the Ops and the Ops were liable to pay the damages caused to the vehicle for replacement of the parts and payment of labor charges. Complainant provided the estimate to the Op no.2 which was prepared by the authorized dealer but the damaged part of the vehicle was not replaced on the pretext of the part being broken since before the accident which took place 16.3.2023 and ops were informed. Complainant is entitled for compensation against the damages.       
3. Ops were issued notice by registered post and only Op no 1 and 3 have filed WS and Op no.2 has not contest the case.
4. Op no 1 and 3 admitted in WS the receiving of the information of damages caused to the vehicle and appointment of surveyor Neeraj Sharma who submitted the estimate Rs.1961.40 and stated delay in disposal of the claim for want of papers. It was also stated that the complainant wanted to change side foot panel which was denied on account of being broken since before the accident.  
5. Complainant has filed his affidavit and papers in support of his pleadings. Ops no 1 and 3 have also filed affidavit and papers in support of their pleadings.

6. We have perused the material available on record and heard the parties counsel.

7. The first question of consideration before us is whether the complainant is entitled to any relief?

8. Admittedly, the vehicle owned by the complainant was insured with the Ops no. 1 and 3 and the complainant had informed the ops about the damages caused to the vehicle. Ops appointed surveyor who estimated the cost of damages Rs.1961.40 and claim appears not to have been  settled on account of dispute of replacement of side foot panel. There appears no satisfactory reason of denying the replacement of side foot panel. Ops are liable to pay the estimated amount Rs.1961.40 and to pay the price of side foot panel with compensation and litigation expenses
9. The question formulated above is decided in favor of the complainant.
10. We hereby direct the Op no.1 and3  to pay the complainant amount Rs.1961.40 plus  the price of side foot panel with pendente lite and future interest @ 9% per annum. OPno. 1 and 3 are  also pay Rs.10000 as compensation for harassment and Rs.5000 as litigation expenses.
11. Op shall comply with the direction within 30 days failing which Ops shall be prosecuted for non-compliance in accordance with section 72 of the Act for awarding punishment against him.
12. A copy of this judgment be provided to all the parties as per rule as mandated by Consumer Protection Act, 2019. The judgment be uploaded forthwith on the website of the commission for the perusal of the parties.
13. File be consigned to record room along with a copy of this judgment.