District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission ,Faridabad.
Consumer Complaint No.343/2019.
Date of Institution: 15.07.2019.
Date of Order: 03.03.2023.
Harun S/o Shri Chand Lal r/o House No. F-83, Adarsh Colony, S.G.M. Nagar, NIT, Faridabad.
…….Complainant……..
Versus
1. M/s. Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. E-6, RIICO Industrial Area, Sitapur, Jaipur (Rajasthan) through its Managing Director/Principal Office (Service be affected through its Divisional Officer at NIT, Faridabad).
2. M/s. Shriram General Insurance Company Ltd., Plot No.55, B.P. Near Abhinandan Hotel and Peer Baba Mazar, NIT, Faridabad through its Divisional Manager/Branch Manager.
…Opposite parties……
Complaint under section-12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986
Now amended Section 34 of Consumer protection Act 2019.
BEFORE: Amit Arora……………..President
Mukesh Sharma…………Member.
Indira Bhadana………….Member.
PRESENT: Sh. J.S.Bhadana, Shri Rajesh Gautam, counsel for the complainant.
Sh. Rakesh Dabaas, counsel for opposite parties.
ORDER:
The facts in brief of the complaint are that the complainant was registered owner of the vehicle bearing its registration NO. HR-38S-1018 which was duly insured with opposite party No.2 vide insurance policy No. 10003/30/16/19838 valid from 19.07.2015 to 18.07.2016 for an amount of Rs.5,22,700/- . The above said vehicle of the complainant was financed with opposite party No.1 as per the terms and conditions mentioned in the agreement, which was duly executed between the complainant and opposite party NO.1, the financed amount was to be repaid by the complainant in monthly instalments. Accordingly, the complainant made the repayment of the said financed amount to opposite party No.1 from time to time in monthly installments. On 12.04.2016 the vehicle of the complainant met with a road side accident, which took place at Narayanpur Dairy, within the jurisdiction of police station Chhatari, District – Bulandsahar (U.P) and in this regard an FIR No. 87 dated 14.04.2016 was registered at police station Chhatari District Bulandsahar (U.P). In the said accident, the vehicle of the complainant was totally damaged. The complainant informed opposite party No.2 immediately about the said accident as well as totally damage of the vehicle in question. At that time the representative of opposite party No.2 stated to the complainant to get repair his vehicle at Faridabad in any agency/private mechanic and they would release the payment of amount to be spent by the complainant. Accordingly, as per the assurance of opposite party No.2 the complainant took his vehicle from the place of occurrence by hiring crane to Faridabad and for which the complainant spent Rs.20,000/- as hire rent of crane service at that time. As per the instruction of opposite parties, the complainant obtain an estimate of the expenses of the vehicle in question on account of its repairing to be spent from some private mechanic, which was spent to opposite party No.2, but opposite party No.2 did not pay even a single penny to the complainant at that time. The said damaged vehicle of the complainant parked with private mechanic for its repair and later on, on the assurance of the opposite party No.2, the mechanic repaired the vehicle and the mechanic asked to make the payment of repairing charges as well as parking charges. Due to totally damaged of the said vehicle, the complainant could not run his vehicle on the road hence he had suffered a huge loss in his business, due to the said reason, the complainant could not deposit the monthly installment to the financed amount to opposite party No.1, resultantly opposite party No.1 had been making regular threats to snatch the vehicle in question from the lawful custody of the complainant forcibly and illegally. The complainant informed about the accident of the vehicle to the opposite party No.2 on complaint by the complainant to the opposite party No.2, the Manager Shri Kuldeep Sharma instructed the complainant to take the accidental vehicle bearing No. HR-38-S-1018 to the private agency namely S.S. Automobile though the complainant instead to get the vehicle repaired through the authorized dealer but the officials of opposite party took the benefit of illiteracy of the complainant and misguided him that if he got his vehicle repaired through agency the opposite party No.2 would reject his claim. Being illiterate and innocent the complainant had to follow the instructions of the officials of opposite party No.2. The vehicle was remain in the custody of M/s. S.S. Automobile Garaj which had been kept in the instruction of opposite party No.2. Thereafter the complainant was called by opposite parties Nos.1 & 2 visit their office for some signatures on the phone. Both the officials of opposite parties Nos.1 & 2 got signatures on some blank papers and panting papers without disclosing the contents of the printing forms. Being illiterate and innocent, believing the officials signed the papers as per their desire. Thereafter during the proceedings of the complaint before this Hon’ble Forum in previous complaint titled as Harun Versus M/s. Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. came to know that both the opposite parties file their reply by stating that an amount of Rs.1,50,000/- was released as per the surveyor report but the complainant flatly refused and prayed that his vehicle be repaired through the authorized dealer so that the vehicle could be repaired and can be delivered to the complainant in a running condition. The complainant approached several times to the opposite party No.2 to make the payment of parking charges of the said vehicle @ 500/- per day since June 2016 to tail date. The aforesaid act of opposite parties amounts to deficiency of service and hence the complaint. The complainant has prayed for directions to the opposite parties to:
a) get the accidental vehicle bearing No. HR-3-S-1018 repaired in a running condition from the authorized dealer.
b) pay Rs. 2.00,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment .
c) pay Rs. 20,000 /- as litigation expenses.
2. Opposite parties Nos.1 & 2 put in appearance through counsel and filed written statement wherein Opposite parties Nos.1 & 2 refuted claim of the complainant and submitted that at the very threshold of the allegations contained in the complaint, the present complaint of the complainant was not maintainable as the insurance company had already released/paid the admissible and/or the payable claim amount, in view of survey report as Rs.1,50,000/- , in full & final settlement of the opposite party No.1. It was submitted that the complainant- insured had lodged his own damage claim as to insured vehicle with the insurance company and for which the insurance company had deputed an independent surveyor so as to assess the loss, in turn, after survey, the said surveyor had submitted his survey report, whereby, assessed the payable loss as Rs.1,50,000/-, resultantly, the insurance company had already released/paid the admissible and/or the payable claim amount, in view of survey report as Rs.1,50,000/- , in full & final settlement to opposite party No.1. Opposite parties denied rest of the allegations leveled in the complaint and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
3. The parties led evidence in support of their respective versions.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record on the file.
5. In this case the complaint was filed by the complainant against opposite parties – Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. & Anr. with the prayer to: a) get the accidental vehicle bearing No. HR-3-S-1018 repaired in a running condition from the authorized dealer. b)pay Rs. 2.00,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment . c) pay Rs. 20,000 /- as litigation expenses
To establish his case he has led Ex.CW1/A – affidavit of Harun,, Ex.C-1 – RC,, Ex.C-2 – Driving licence, Ex.C-3 – Certificate cum policy schedule,, Ex
.C-4(colly) – Receipt, Ex.C-5 – FIR, Ex.C-6 – Bill. Ex.C-7 – Estimate.
On the other hand counsel for the opposite parties strongly agitated and opposed. . As per the evidence of the opposite parties, Ex.RW1/A – affidavit of Praveen Kumar Chhipa Manager (Legal), M/s. Shriram General Insurance Co. Ltd., E-8, EPIP, RIICO Indsustrial Area, Sitapura, Jaipur, Annx.A – RC, Annexure B – Certificate Cum Policy Schedule,, Annx. C – FIR, Annx D - Motor Insurance Claim form, Annx. E - No claim letter, Annx.F - Survey report Accident Photos Documents Photos Workshop, Annx. G – Motor Claim Approval Sheet,, Annx. H – Consent letter.
6. In this complaint, the complainant has prayed in his prayer clause to get the accidental vehicle bearing No. HR-3-S-1018 repaired in a running condition from the authorized dealer.
7. As per Consent letter vide Annexure H in which it has been stated that” After the mutual discussions and negations, I agree to retain the salvage with me and I am agreeing for the net of salvage/cash loss mode of settlement for an amount of Rs.1,50,000/- as full and final amount for the above said accidental claim. Also I have no objection if the payment to be made in favour of the financer. The insurance company had already released/paid the admissible and/or the payable claim amount, in view of survey report as Rs.1,50,000/- , in full & final settlement to the opposite party No.1.
8. After going through the evidence led by the parties, the Commission is of the opinion that no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. Resultantly, the complaint is dismissed. Copy of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of costs. File be consigned to the record room.
Announced on: 03.03.2023 (Amit Arora)
President
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Faridabad.
(Mukesh Sharma)
Member
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Faridabad.
(Indira Bhadana)
Member
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Faridabad.
