Tamil Nadu

StateCommission

a/300/2023

Shriram General Insurance Co. Ltd., Rep. by its General Manager & Anr. - Complainant(s)

Versus

Mr. B.Kalidoss, S/o M.Balakrishnan & Anr. - Opp.Party(s)

M/s Elveera Ravindiran

28 Apr 2023

ORDER

IN THE TAMILNADU STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHENNAI.

 

Present:   Hon’ble THIRU JUSTICE R. SUBBIAH  : PRESIDENT

                 THIRU R  VENKATESAPERUMAL          :    MEMBER

 

F.A. No. 300 of 2023

(Against the Order passed in C.C. No.14 of 2022 dated 25.08.2022 on the file of the D.C.D.R.C., Erode)

 

Dated the 28^th day of April 2023

Shriram General Insurance Company Ltd.,

Represented by its General Manager,

E-8, EPIP RIICO Industrial Area,

Sitapura,

Jaipur – 302 022.                          .. Appellant / 1^st Opposite party.

- Vs –

1. Mr. B. Kalidoss,

S/o. Mr. M. Balakrishnan,

D. No.9/9, Nanjappa Street,

Cross – 1,

Thavittu Palayam,

Anthiyur Taluk,

Erode District.                                .. 1^st Respondent/ Complainant.

 

2. My TVS Thiyagu Automotives,

Represented by its Manager,

Thiyagu Automobiles,

No.1E, Mettur Main Road,

Near Opili Mill,

K.N. Palayam,

Bavani – 638 301.               .. 2^nd Respondent / 2^nd Opposite party.

 

Counsel for Appellant / 1^st Opposite party :  M/s. Elveera Ravindran

Counsel for 1^st Respondent/ Complainant  :  M/s. N. Maheswaraiah

Counsel for 2^nd Respondent / 2^nd Opposite party : M/s. R. Prabakar                                                                       

                The 1^st Respondent as complainant had filed a complaint before the District Commission against the opposite parties praying for certain directions.  The District Commission had passed an ex-parte order, allowing the complaint. Against the said ex-parte order, this appeal is preferred by the 1^st opposite party praying to set aside the order of the District Commission dt. 25.08.2022 in C.C. No.14/2022.

 

                This petition came before us for hearing finally on today  and upon hearing the arguments of the counsel appearing for the both sides, perusing the documents, lower court records and the order passed by the District Commission, this Commission made the following order in the open court.

ORDER

 

JUSTICE R. SUBBIAH ,  PRESIDENT  (Open court)

 

1.     The 1^st opposite party before the District Commission is the appellant herein.

2.     The case of the complainant before the District Commission is that he purchased Ashok Leyland Dost 4 wheeler van bearing Registration No.TN36 BZ 7412 in the month of June 2020.  The said vehicle was insured with the 1^st opposite party for a sum of Rs.6,90,000/- and the period of policy is from 10.06.2020 to 09.06.2021.  The complainant also paid the premium of Rs.22,974/-.  He purchased the said vehicle through bank loan by paying monthly EMI of Rs.18,000/- till date without fail.  While so, on 14.11.2020 at around 03.50 A.M., the complainant’s vehicle met with an accident.   Due to the said accident, the front portion of the cabin and the chassis of the vehicle were fully damaged.  The complainant and cleaner also sustained injuries and a case has been registered against the complainant in Siruvalur Police Station on 14.11.2020.  The complainant also made a claim with the opposite party since there was insurance coverage.   The Surveyor of the 1^st opposite party had also inspected the vehicle.   The 2^nd opposite party estimated the cost of repairs, completed the repair works and prepared the final bill for carrying out the repairs for Rs.5,13,283/- and the 1^st opposite party had also acknowledged to settle the said bill amount.  But against the total claim amount of Rs.5,13,283/- only a sum of Rs.3,30,000/- has been settled by the 1^st opposite party.  The complainant had approached the 1^st opposite party for several times but the 1^st opposite party has not come forward to settle the full invoice amount.  Hence, after issuing notice this complainant has been filed before the District Commission for the following reliefs:-

(i) To pay a sum of Rs.1,83,283/- along with interest;

(ii) To pay a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- towards compensation for damages and also for mental pain and sufferings;

(iii) To pay the cost of Rs.25,000/- to the complainant.

 

3.     The 1^st opposite party has not filed written version through an Advocate and hence, the appellant/ 1^st opposite party was set exparte on 22.06.2022 before the District Commission.  Consequently, the District Commission passed an ex-parte order directing the 1^st opposite party to pay the balance amount of Rs.1,83,283/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% p.a. and to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards compensation for deficiency in service, mental agony and a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards cost of the proceedings to the complainant.  The District Commission dismissed the claim against the 2^nd opposite party.

 

4.     Aggrieved over the said order, this appeal is preferred by the 1^st opposite party, praying for setting aside the order and for a chance to contest the case on merits. 

 

5.     Before this commission, the counsel for the appellant/1^st opposite party submitted that there is no deficiency of service on their part and that they have got valid defense and a fair chance of succeeding the complaint.  The appellant / 1^st opposite party duly received the notice and appeared before the District       Commission through their Counsel and due to pandemic, the appellant /1^st opposite party was not able to ascertain the claim papers before the mandatory period.  Hence, the appellant /1^st opposite party could not file his version within time and set exparte on 22.06.2022.  Therefore, he sought to set aside the order of the District Commission and prayed for an opportunity to contest the case on merits.

 

 

6.     When the case had come up before this Commission on 27.04.2023, after hearing the submission of the appellant, this Commission had felt that there is some force in the arguments of the counsel for the appellant/1^st opposite party and therefore, in order to give a chance to the 1^st opposite party to agitate their right on merits, was inclined to allow this appeal by remanding the matter to the District Commission, to dispose of the case on merit.   However, considering the lethargic attitude of the 1^st opposite party, in non-filing of written version before the District Commission, we imposed a cost of Rs.3000/- to be paid to the Legal Aid Account of the State Commission on or before 27.04.2023.  Today, when the matter appeared in the list it was reported that the condition imposed by this Commission has been complied with.    Hence, this appeal is allowed today by remanding back the complaint to the District Commission for fresh disposal according to law.   

In the result, the appeal is allowed by setting aside the order of the District Commission, Erode in C.C. No.14/2022 dt.25.08.2022, and the matter is remanded back to the District Commission, Erode for fresh disposal according to law and on merits.

 

 The parties are directed to appear before the District Commission, Erode on 01.06.2023, for taking further instructions.  On which date itself, the 1^st opposite party shall file their Version, proof affidavit and documents if any. The District Commission is directed to dispose of the complaint, within three months from the date of appearance, according to law and on merits.  

 The amount deposited by the appellant, shall remain in the custody of this Commission, till the disposal of the original complaint.

 

 

 

   R  VENKATESAPERUMAL                                                                             R. SUBBIAH

                 MEMBER                                                                                                PRESIDENT

 

Index :  Yes/ No

KIR/SCDRC/Chennai/Orders/April/2023.