STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
BIHAR : PATNA.
(Complaint Case No. 43 of 2016)
Ramjee Prasad Agrawal,
S/O- Shaligram Agrawal
R/O- 51, Kadam Kuan, Patna Complainant.
Versus
M.D Cholamandlam,
MS Insurance Co. Ltd.
Chennai and another Opposite parties.
Present:
Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.K. Sinha, President,
Hon’ble Shri Upendra Jha, ADM (Retd) Member,
Hon’ble Smt. Renu Sinha, Member (F)
20.01.2017 O R D E R ON ADMISSION MATTER
Upendra Jha, Member.
This complaint is preferred by the complainant against the opposite parties with a prayer to direct the opposite parties for payment of Rs. 1,34,800/- as insurance claim Rs. 1,50,0000/- ( One lac fifty thousand only) by way of motor garage rent Rs. 30.52 lacs interest @ 48% P.A. due to non- repair of Vehicle and other charges altogether Rs. 39,93,200/-.
2. Brief facts of this case is that the complainant purchased a vehicle by taking loan of Rs. 10.00 lacs from Cholamandlam Investment and Finance company Ltd. through Patna Branch and the vehicle was insured by the opposite party for Rs. 10,83,730/-. On the way of Koilkata, this vehicle met with an accident on 27.07.2014 in West Bengal. F.I.R was lodged in local police station. The opposite party was informed who deputed a surveyor to assess the loss of damage. The Surveyor reported a loss of Rs. 1,34,800/-. But the claim was not settled. Then the complainant has filed this complaint for the above relief.
3. The opposite party filed a preliminary objection stating that this complaint is not entertainable before this commission for want of pecuniary jurisdiction as the sum assured of this vehicle is Rs. 10,83,739/- and the survey or has assured the loss of Rs. 1,34,800/-. As the complainant did not submit the required document hence the claim was not settled. This complement is fit to be dismissed at the admission stage.
4. Heard the parties and perused the documents filed by the parties as also the preliminary objection raised by the opposite party. It is clear that the vehicle was insured for Rs. 10,83,739/- only and the surveyor assessed the loss of damage for Rs. 1,34,800/- only other claims like 48% P.A. interest for Rs. 30,52,000/- others are not justified. Under section 17 (I) (a) (i) of the consumer protection Act 1986 State Commission has jurisdiction where the value of the goods or services and compensation if any exceeds Rs. 20,00000/- ( Twenty lacs) but does not exceed Rs. 1,000000/- ( One crore only). The claimed amount in our openion is below Rs. 20,00000/- ( Twenty lacs only). Hence the complaint is not maintainable before this commission. Therefore, it is dismissed at the admission stage itself. However, we have not expressed our view regarding the merits of this case. If so adduced, the complaint file complaint before an appropriate District Forum.
This complaint is dismissed let a free copy of this order be issued to the concerned parties free of cost.
S.K.Sinha Renu Sinha Upendra Jha
President Member(F) Member(M)
Mukund