DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, NORTH-WEST
GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI
CSC-BLOCK-C, POCKET-C, SHALIMAR BAGH, DELHI-110088.
D.No.__________________ Date: ________________
IN THE MATTER OF:
CC No: 121/2017
Dr. SHYAM SUNDER PANDA,
S/o SH. RAM CHANDER PANDA,
R/o C-129, VIJAY VIHAR,
PHASE-II, DELHI.
CC No: 122/2017
LALIT KHANDUJA,
C/o Dr. SHYAM SUNDER PANDA,
R/o C-129, VIJAY VIHAR,
PHASE-II, DELHI.… COMPLAINANT (s)
Versus
1. M/s MIRAGE ENTERPRISES,
THROUGH ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY,
WZ-3361, 2nd FLOOR, MAHINDRA PARK,
ROAD No.44,RANI BAGH, DELHI-110034.
2.M/s BANSAL TELECOMS
G-2, R.G. COMPLEX,
COMMUNITY CENTRE,
SEC-8, ROHINI, DELHI-110085.
3. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE Co. LTD.,
2nd FLOOR, RG CITY CENTRE,
LSC BLOCK B, LAWRENCE ROAD
DELHI-110035 . … OPPOSITE PARTY(IES)
CORAM:SH. M.K. GUPTA, PRESIDENT
SH. BARIQ AHMED, MEMBER
MS. USHA KHANNA, MEMBER
Date of Institution: 09.02.2017
Date of decision:10.10.2019
CC Nos.121/2017 & 122/2017 Page 1 of 7
SH.M.K. GUPTA, PRESIDENT
ORDER
1. By this common order, the above 2 complaint cases are being decided together as the OPs in the cases are same and facts are common and same point in issued has arisen. The complainants have filed the complaints against OPsunder the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 thereby alleging that the complainantsbeing the friends purchased 2 mobile handsets i.e. in CC No.121/2017, the complainantpurchased Samsung J-700 vide IMEI No.356273077677543 for a sum of Rs.13,990/- bearing invoice no.9618 &in CC No.122/2017, the complainant purchased mobile handset vide IMEI No. 356273077678053 for a sum of Rs.13,990/-vide invoice no.9617 on 02.02.2016 from OP-2 but at the time of giving the delivery of the mobile handsets by OP-2, the boxes of the mobile handsets were exchanged as a result of which the mobile handset purchased by the complainants went into the hand of other the complainant and they both started using the mobile handset without such knowledge.
2. In CC No. 121/2017, on 13.05.2016 at about 9:15 P.M., when the complainant went to purchase the Vegetable in Friday Market, Sector-6, Rohini, Delhi and was purchasing the vegetables, some unknown person stole the above said mobile from the pocket of the
CC Nos.121/2017 & 122/2017 Page 2 of 7
complainant and the complainant tried to search out the same butin vain hence the complainant got a FIR registered with E-Police Station u/s 379 IPC vide FIR No.OD-NR-000107.
3. In CC No.122/2017, on 17.05.2016 at about 10:00 P.M., when the complainant reached Karol Bagh, New Delhi on his way back from his duty, few persons came towards him, touched their bodies with the complainant and snatched the mobile handset from his pocket for which a FIR bearing no. CD-KB-000195 dated 18.05.2016 u/s 379 IPC was registered at P.S. Karol Bagh, Delhi.
4. The complainants further alleged that they came about the exchange of the mobile handsets only when the complainant went to lodge the FIR of theft with the police station and prior to that the complainants were never aware that the mobile handsets purchased by them have been exchanged. Thereafter, the complainants tried their level best to trace out mobile handsets but in vain till today and the said mobile handsets were got insured by OP-2 and both the parties are liable to pay the insured amount of above said mobile handsets to the complainants. The complainants further alleged that the complainant sent legal notices through their Counsel to OPs but OPs neither gave any reply nor paid the insured amount and the complainants submitted that there is deficiency in service on the part of OPs.
5. On these allegations the complainantshave filed the complaints
CC Nos.121/2017 & 122/2017 Page 3 of 7
praying for direction to OPs to make the payment of Rs.1,00,000/-as compensation which includes mental torture, mental agony, loss of reputation etc. and the insured amount of the mobile handset to the complainant immediately with fine, penalty and interest.
6. Only OP-3 has been contesting the case and has filed reply and OP-1 & OP-2 have been proceeded ex-parte. OP-3 in its reply submitted that the case is not maintainable and there is no deficiency in service on the part of OP-3 and case is liable to be dismissed. OP-3 further submitted that the complaints shows that the complainants were using the mobile handsets of his friend and said mobile handset was stolen by someone from him and it is admitted case that the said mobile handset was not insured in his name and the complainants have no insurable interest as the subject matter i.e. the mobile handset was not insured in his name and he is a stranger for OP and he cannot claim any amount from OP. OP-3 further submitted that as per the terms & conditions of the policy, the insured is also not entitled for any claim due to the following reasons: “User is other than insured, the complaint to police is given by one Lalit Khanduja relationship with policy terms & conditions i.e. “Beneficiary/User” which states insurer is not liable for loss: “Beneficiary/User”- Purchase whose name is mentioned in purchase invoice, however, his/her spouse, children and parents can use the equipment.”
CC Nos.121/2017 & 122/2017 Page 4 of 7
7. The complainantsfiledseparate rejoindersand denied the contentions of OP-3.
8. In order to prove their cases, the complainants filed their affidavits in evidence and also filed written arguments. The complainants havealso placed on record copies of FIRs, copies of retail invoices no.9618& 9617 dated 02.02.2016 for purchasing mobile handsets model Samsung J-700 for a sum of Rs.13,990/- each from OP-2, copies of We care For You/Protection Cards issued by OP-3, copies of legal notices dated 20.07.2016, 02.08.2016& 23.01.2017 alongwith copies of postal receipts and acknowledgement cards.
9. On the other hand, Sh. Ramesh Kumar Mehar, Senior Divisional Manager ofOP-3 filed his affidavit in evidence. OP-3 also filed written arguments.
10. This forum has considered the case of the complainants in the lightof evidence of both the parties and documents placed on record bythe complainants. The case of the complainants have remained consistent and undoubted. There is nothing on record to disbelieve the case of the complainants. It is not disputed by OP-3 that the mobile handsets which were purchased by the complainants were insured by OP-3 and it is also not disputed by OP-3 that the mobile handsets of the complainants which were insured by OP-3 have been lost and OP-3 being the insurer is liable to pay the price of the lost article which OP-3 has failed. It is not expected that the
CC Nos.121/2017 & 122/2017 Page 5 of 7
complainant would have lodged separate FIR with the police inrespect of his stolen mobile handsets. Thus, we are of opinion that OP-3 has failed to prove its defence. Accordingly, OP-3ought not to has repudiated the claim of the complainants and thus OP-3 is held guilty of unfair trade practice and deficiency in service.
11. Accordingly,OP-3is directed as under:
i) To refund to each of the complainants an amount of Rs.13,990/- being the price paid by the complainantsof the mobile handsets and insurance policy.
ii) To pay to each of the complainants an amount of Rs.8,000/- as compensation towards mental agony and harassment caused to the complainants.
iii) To pay to each of the complainants an amount of Rs.5,000/- being the cost of litigation.
12. The above amount shall be paid by both OP-3 to the complainants within 30 days from the date of receiving copy of this order failing which OP-3 shall beliable to pay interest on the entire awarded amount @ 10% perannum from the date of receiving copy of this order till the date of payment. If OP-3 fails to comply the order within 30 days from the date of receiving copy of this order, thecomplainants may approach this Forum u/s 25 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
CC Nos.121/2017 & 122/2017 Page 6 of 7
13. Let a copy of this orders be placed in other file and be sent to each party free of cost as per regulation 21 of the Consumer Protection Regulations, 2005. Thereafter file be consigned to record room.
Announced on this 10th day of October, 2019.
BARIQ AHMED USHA KHANNA M.K. GUPTA
(MEMBER) (MEMBER) (PRESIDENT)
CC Nos.121/2017 & 122/2017 Page 7 of 7
