Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rohtak.
Complaint No. : 97.
Instituted on : 26.02.2019
Decided on : 28.10.2024.
Jai Singh son of Ranbir Singh resident of village Gugaheri Tehsil Meham District Rohtak.
………..Complainant.
Vs.
- National Insurance Company Limited, Outer Quilla Road, Rohtak through its Manager/Incharge.
- M/s Shri Krishna Auto, Sonepat Stand, Rohtak through its Manager.
….……….Opposite parties.
COMPLAINT U/S 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986.
BEFORE: SH.NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT.
DR. TRIPTI PANNU, MEMBER.
DR.VIJENDER SINGH, MEMBER
Present: Sh.DevenderVerma, Advocate for complainant.
Sh.A.S.Malik, Advocate for opposite party No.1.
Sh.Nikhil Chopra Advocate for the opposite party No.2.
ORDER
NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT:
1. Brief facts of the case, as per the complainant are that he is owner of vehicle no.HR-15D-5485 and the same was got insured from the opposite party for the period from 04.09.2019 to 03.09.2019. It is further submitted that complainant while plying/driving the scooty on the road on 05.12.2018, fell down and the scooty was damaged. The complainant informed to the opposite party and opposite party directed the complainant to get the vehicle repaired and surveyor was also appointed. The opposite party assured the complainant that the repair charges would be paid to him lateron in the account of complainant but till today no amount has been paid by the opposite party to the complainant. Accordingly, the scooty was got repaired from Shri Krishna Auto, Rohtak and an amount of Rs.5200/- was paid by the complainant on 21.01.2019. Complainant requested the respondent to pay the claim amount but the same has been refused by the opposite party. Hence, this complaint and it has been prayed that opposite party may kindly be directed to pay an amount of Rs.5200/- as repair charges and Rs.20000/- as compensation for harassing the complainant, deficiency in service and litigation expenses etc. to the complainant.
2. After registration of complaint, notices were issued to the opposite parties. Opposite party No.1 in its reply has submitted that complaint is pre-mature. Opposite party deputed Mr. Sunil Vashist, surveyor and loss assessor to assess the loss in respect of Activa No.HR-15D-5485. He submitted his report on 27.12.2018 in the office of opposite party and assessed the liability/loss of Rs.4500/-. Competent authority approved the said amount and asked the complainant to supply the bank account details so that the said amount will be released in his bank account. But inspite of submission of bank account details, complainant preferred to file the present complaint. So, the complainant is not maintainable at this stage. It is further submitted that the opposite party is ready to pay the amount of Rs.4500/- in the bank account of the complainant, if he is ready to furnish his bank account details. All the other contents of the complaint were stated to be wrong and denied and opposite party prayed for dismissal of complaint with costs.
3. Opposite party No.2 in its reply has submitted that surveyor was appointed by the opposite party No.1 and as per terms and conditions of the insurance company, the insurance company has assessed and passed Rs.4500/- in favour of the complainant which was later-on deposited in the bank account of the opposite party. It is further submitted that the opposite party has sent the cheque bearing no.034794 dated 15.03.2019 amounting to Rs.4500/- to the complainant through Indian Post No.RH387441038IN but the complainant with malafide intention just to harass the opposite party, denied to receive the same. Opposite party is ready even today to pay the amount of Rs.4500/- as assessed and passed by the insurance company to the complainant. All the other contents of the complaint were stated to be wrong and denied and opposite party prayed for dismissal of complaint with costs.
4. Ld. counsel for the complainant in his evidence has tendered affidavit Ex.CW1/A, documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C5 and closed his evidence on 16.10.2023. On the other hand, ld. counsel for the opposite party No.1 has tendered affidavit Ex.RW1/A, documents Ex.R1 to Ex.R4 and closed his evidence on 18.03.2024. Ld. Counsel for opposite party No.2 made a statement that reply already filed on its behalf be read in evidence and closed his evidence on 24.07.2024.
5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the material aspects of the case very carefully.
6. In the present case accident had taken place on 05.12.2018 and apayment of Rs.5200/- was made on 21.01.2019 by the complainant to the opposite party no.2 on account of repair charges. Complainant filed the claim with the opposite party no.1 but the same has not been paid by the opposite party No.1. On the other hand, as per written statement filed by respondent no.1, National Insurance Company has submitted that the surveyor has made assessment of liability as Rs.4500/- against the bill of Rs.5200/-. As per the respondent no.1 they had paid an amount of Rs.4500/- on 06.03.2019 to the opposite party no.2 against the repair bill of vehicle of the complainant. As per the written statement filed by the opposite party No.1, the insurance company has assessed and passed Rs.4500/- in favour of the complainant and which was later on deposited in the bank account of opposite party No.2. It is further contended that opposite party no.2 had sent the cheque no.034794 dated 15.03.2019 amounting to Rs.4500/- to the complainant through Indian Post No.RH387441038IN but the complainant denied to receive the same. At the time of arguments, the respondent no.2 also placed on record photocopy of a postalreceipt/registered cover as well as photocopy of the cheque. The photocopy of registered cover envelope is placed on record as ‘Annexure JNB’. The perusal ofthis document shows that proper address has not been mentioned by the respondent no.2 upon the envelope.Simply the name of the complainant is mentioned upon the envelope without the father’s name.There may be some other persons in the alleged village having same name. As per the written statement and copy of cheque ‘Annexure JN-A’, the cheque has been issued on 15.03.2019 whereas as per Annexure-JNB the refusal date is mentioned as 03.06.2019. Meaning thereby the cheque was belatedly delivered by the respondent no.1.Even the cheque has been issued after filing of the present complaint.Moreover there is no proper address of the complainant on the alleged envelope, which shows that there is deficiency in service on the part of O.P. No.2. As such opposite party no.2 is liable to pay the amount of Rs.4500/-alongwith interest &compensation to the complainant.
7. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, we hereby allow the complaint and direct the opposite party No.2 to pay the amount of Rs.4500/-(Rupees four thousand and five hundred only) alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing the present complaint i.e. 26.02.2019 till its realisation and shall also pay Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand only) as compensation on account of deficiency in service and Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand only) as litigation expenses to the complainant. Order shall be complied within one month from the date of decision.
8. Application(s) pending, if any, stand disposed of in terms of the aforesaid judgment.
9. Copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced in open court:
28.10.2024.
................................................
Nagender Singh Kadian, President
………………………………..
TriptiPannu, Member.
……………………………….
Vijender Singh, Member
