BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES
REDRESSAL FORUM, JALANDHAR.
Complaint No.47 of 2018
Date of Instt. 02.02.2018
Date of Decision: 07.01.2019
Sukhjinder Singh Bawa son of Sh. Sukhwant Singh Bawa R/o 3-A Jyoti Nagar, Jalandhar.
..........Complainant
Versus
M/s Syska Gadget Secure, C/o SSK LED Lights Pvt. Ltd. SCO No.109, 1st Floor, Sector 47-C, Chandigarh, Through its Manager/Authorized Person.
….….. Opposite Party
Complaint Under the Consumer Protection Act.
Before: Sh. Karnail Singh (President)
Smt. Jyotsna Thatai (Member)
Present: Sh. P. M. S. Narang, Adv Counsel for the Complainant.
OP exparte.
Order
Karnail Singh (President)
1. The instant complaint has been filed by the complainant u/S 12 of the Consumer Protection Act against the OP on the allegations of deficiency in service and unfair trade practice with the prayer that the complaint of the complainant may kindly be allowed and directions to be given to the OP to admit the genuine claim of the complainant, to the tune of Rs.20,000/- along with interest @ 18% per annum from the date of submission of claim till its realization and the OPs be also liable to pay Rs.50,000/- for the mental tension and harassment and be also directed to pay litigation expenses of Rs.10,000/-.
2. The brief facts of the complaint are that the complainant had purchased one mobile make Samsung A5, having EMEI No.359932061236742 from M/s Mobile Zone Co., Shop No.1, Bajwa Complex, Model Town Market, Jalandhar, vdie their Invoice No.2345 dated 28.07.2015 and at the same time got the said mobile insured from the said shop under the policy issued by representative of OP, vide policy NO.1197665. That the said mobile was snatched from the wife of the complainant Smt. Damanjit Kaur on 27.10.2015 while she was going on rickshaw and intimation on this regard was immediately given to the police and ultimately FIR No.92 dated 06.11.2015 was registered at PS Division No.6, Jalandhar.
3. That on 28.10.2015, the complainant approached OP regarding the snatching of mobile and complainant was informed by Mr. Vishal Sarswat, Incharge of Jalandhar Area of OP to handover all the documents and claim form pertaining to the claim of loss of mobile phone at M/s Mobile Zone Company, Shop No.1, Bajwa Complex, Jalandhar and the agent of OP regularly visited the said shop and will collect all the documents from the said shop for processing of the claim. Accordingly, complainant gave all the documents at Mobile Zone Company, Shop No.1, Bajwa Complex, Jalandhar to Mr. Jatinderpal Singh and Harman Singh on 14.11.2015. That thereafter complainant kept on inquiring about the said claim from Mr. Vishal Sarswat, Mr. Jatinderpal Singh and Mr. Harman Singh, who told complainant that his documents have not been processed and are lying them and shall be processed very soon. That as nothing was being done and as per instructions of employees of OP, complainant collected the documents from Mobile Zone Company, Shop No.1, Bajwa Complex, Jalandhar and directly sent the same to OP on 19.12.2015 under his covering letter along with all required documents, but OP has not replied to the communication of complainant and has failed to admit and process the genuine claim of the complainant. The complainant after the rejection of his genuine claim by the OP, got served legal notice dated 22.06.2016 upon the OP and OP gave reply dated 04.08.2016 to the legal notice on the flimsy grounds. That the OP has wrongly, arbitrarily and malafidely rejected the genuine claim of the complainant and is not settling the claim of the complainant, thus is guilty of committing unfair trade practices and rendering deficient and negligent services to the consumer and has caused harassment to the complainant. Hence, this complaint.
4. After the formal admission of the complaint, notice was issued to the OP, but despite service none has come present on behalf of the OP and ultimately, OP was proceed against exparte.
5. In order to prove his exparte claim, the counsel for the complainant tendered into evidence affidavit of the complainant Ex.CA along with documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-14 and then closed the evidence.
6. We have heard the learned counsel for the complainant and also examined the material on the record and given a thoughtful consideration to the arguments advanced before us.
7. The complainant had purchased one mobile make Samsung A5 for Rs.20,000/- from OP i.e. M/s Mobile Zone Co., vide Invoice dated 28.07.2015, which is Ex.C-1 and at the same time got the said mobile insured. That the mobile phone was snatched on 27.10.2015, the complainant lodged a complaint and FIR was registered on 06.11.2015 at PS Division No.6, Jalandhar. The complainant further stated that he has informed the incident of snatching of mobile and handed all the documents and claim form at M/s Mobile Zone Co., but later on, he collected the documents from M/s Mobile Zone Co. and directly sent the same to the OPs. According to the complainant, the OPs have rejected the genuine claim of the complainant. Legal notice dated 22.06.2016, which is Ex.C-10 was also served to the OP and reply dated 04.08.2016 Ex.C-11 is also on the file. In the reply to the legal notice, OP has stated that the complainant had not lodged any claim with the Op and had not provided the required documents, but the OP did not bother to appear and contest the complaint before us and he was proceeded against exparte.
8. On the other hand, the complainant has placed on the file one letter dated 04.11.2015, which is Ex.C-9 where the OP has requested the complainant to send his original documents within five working days or otherwise the claim of the complainant will be cancelled.
9. The complainant alleged that he had informed the OP immediately after the theft and also lodged a claim and also filed all the documents, but the complainant has not brought on the file any documents or receipt from where we can construe that the complainant has send all the original documents to the OP. Only insurance claim form Ex.C-4 is on the file. Moreover, letter Ex.C-9 is not the repudiation letter, but it is simply an intimation given to the complainant, where the OP had asked the complainant to send the original documents within five working days to the OP. So, it means the case of the complainant is still pre-mature. So, with these observations, we came to the conclusion that OP must decide the insurance claim of the complainant within one month from the date of receipt of the copy of documents and claim form from complainant. And further the complainant is directed to furnish the claim form as well as all the documents required within 7 days to the OPs from the date of receipt of copy of this order, if the claim of the complainant is not settled on either side within aforesaid stipulated time, the OP is liable to pay the compensation to the complainant, to the tune of Rs.25,000/- and further, it is ordered that if the complainant will not be satisfied with the decision of the OP in regard to the settlement of insurance claim, then the complainant is at liberty to file a fresh complaint on the same cause of action. Thus, this complaint is disposed of. This complaint could not be decided within stipulated time frame due to rush of work.
10. Copies of the order be supplied to the parties free of cost, as per Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the record room.
Dated Jyotsna Thatai Karnail Singh
07.01.2019 Member President
