BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL FORUM, JALANDHAR.

Complaint No.362 of 2014

Date of Instt. 17.10.2014

Date of Decision :28.04.2015

Anoop Singh son of Makhan Singh R/o Nandanpur Colony, Village Nandanpur, PO Nagra Tehsil & District Jalandhar.

..........Complainant

Versus

1. M/s The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd, A-25/27, Asaf Ali Road, New Delhi-110002.

2. The Manager, The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Opp.Circuit House, Near Hotel Sky Lark, Jalandhar City.

.........Opposite parties

Complaint Under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.

Before: S. Jaspal Singh Bhatia (President)

Ms. Jyotsna Thatai (Member)

Sh.Parminder Sharma (Member)

Present: Sh.Gurvinder Arora Adv., counsel for complainant.

Sh.AK Arora Adv., counsel for opposite parties.

Order

J.S Bhatia (President)

1. The complainant has filed the present complaint under section 12 of the the Consumer Protection Act against the opposite parties on the averments that the complainant is a registered owner of Mohindra XYLO 2.5E2 car bearing engine No.BVA4B14035 and Chasis No.MAIYA28VNA2B24223 and bearing registration No.PB-01-7427 of 2010 model. The complainant got the above said vehicle insured from the opposite parties on 13.3.2013 for a sum of Rs.6,10,000/- for which the due premium was also paid by the complainant to the opposite parties. The above said vehicle was used as a taxi by the complainant and the complainant was also having a Tourist Permit/National Permit to ply the said vehicle as a taxi. The copies of the permits are attached. Sh.Nitish Sharma @ Bawa son of Jatinder Kumar R/o Sher Singh Colony, Basti Bawa Khel, Jalandhar was employed as a driver by the complainant to ply the said vehicle. On 27.12.2013, the complainant alongwith one Manohar Lal son of Ram Lubhaya was traveling in car bearing No.PB-01-8405 for his personal work to Nawanshahar whereas the other car of the complainant bearing No.PB-01-7427 was being driven by Nitish Sharma who was going ahead of the car No.PB-01-8405 driven by the complainant. Unfortunately, a truck bearing No.HR-38Y-8485 driven by its driver came at a very hight speed in a rash and negligent manner and hit the car in question, Mohindra XYLO make bearing No.PB-01-7427 driven by Nitish Sharma due to which the car in question was totally damaged and Nitish Sharma died at the spot and the said accident took place a little ahead of village Bahua, near Manila Resort falling within the limits of PS Behram District Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar. The impact of the accident was too high that even all the wheels of truck were also broken and fire caught the truck and number of cattles/buffaloes loaded in the said truck also died. The vehicle in question bearing No.PB-01-7427 was completely damaged in the accident. The complainant got lodged an FIR No.94 dated 28.12.2013 U/s 279/304-A of IPC at PS Behram District Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar with regard to the accident in question. Complainant brought the vehicle in question after making arrangements of transportation to Raga Motors Pvt Ltd, GT Road, Paragpur, Jalandhar who is a dealer of Mohindra XYLO and the loss was surveyed by them to the tune of Rs.9,17,874.16/-. Copy of the service quotation issued by the said Raga Motors Pvt Ltd, Jalandhar with regard to the loss caused to the vehicle in question bearing No.PB-01-7427 in the above said accident is attached. Complainant has requested opposite parties number of times to pay the claim of Rs.6,10,000/-, sum insured of the vehicle, but opposite parties have not acceded to the genuine request of complainant which is no doubt a deficiency in services on part of opposite parties and tantamounts to unfair trade practice. The complainant had suffered a lot of mental tension, harassment, financial loss etc due to the above said unfair trade practice and deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. On such like averments, the complainant has prayed for directing the opposite parties to pay the claim of Rs.6,10,000/-. He has also claimed compensation.

2. Upon notice, the opposite parties appeared and filed a written reply pleading that immediately after the receipt of intimation qua the loss caused to the vehicle in question in the alleged accident occurred on 27.12.2013, M/s ML Mehta & Company, Automobile & Mechanical Engineers were appointed as surveyor to assess the loss to the vehicle. The said surveyor has submitted their survey report dated 10.3.2014 with the opposite parties, vide which they have assessed the loss to the vehicle in question on NETT of Salvage basis to the tune of Rs.4,88,000/-. The complainant also consented to the said survey report vide his consent letter duly attested by Executive Magistrate, Jalandhar, submitted to the company. Driving license of Nitish Sharma son of Jatinder Sharma, who was driving the vehicle at the time of accident, was sent for verification to Licensing Authority/DTO Firozepur, who has issued driving license to Nitish Sharma son of Jatinder Sharma. The said driving license has not been received after verification from the officer of Licensing Authority/ DTO, Firozepur. The said licensing authority is not submitting its report qua the issuance of driving license No.53108 dated 27.4.2012 despite the fact that the information was also sought from the said licensing authority through RTI Act also. That being so, the claim of the complainant is pending with the opposite parties for want of verification of the driving license of the driver of the vehicle namely Nitish Sharma. They denied other material averments of the complainant.

3. In support of his complaint, complainant has tendered into evidence affidavit Ex.CA alongwith copies of documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C9 and closed evidence

4. On the other hand, learned counsel for opposite parties has tendered into evidence affidavits Ex.OP1/A and Ex.OP1/B alongwith copies of documents Ex.OPA to Ex.OPD and closed evidence.

5. We have carefully gone through the record and also heard the learned counsels for the parties.

6. The facts involved in the present case are not much disputed. The insured vehicle of the complainant met with an accident and was damaged. He lodged the claim with opposite party insurance company but the opposite party insurance company has not decided or paid the agreed claim amount of Rs.4,88,000/- to the complainant on the ground that verification report of the driving license of Nitish Sharma has not been received from the licensing authority so far. Ex.C8 is driving license verification report in respect of the driving license No.53108 dated 24.7.2012 of Nitish Sharma son of Jatinder Sharma issued by DTO Firozepur. As per this verification report, the license of Nitish Kumar was valid upto 26.4.2015. The accident took place on 27.12.2013 but till date opposite party insurance company has failed to decide the claim of the complainant on the ground that verification report of the above said driving license has not been obtained from the licensing authority, Firozepur. The verification report issued by DTO Firozepur has been produced by the complainant. The surveyor vide its report Ex.OP1 assessed the loss at Rs.4,88,000/- on nett of salvage basis. The surveyor gave its report on 10.3.2014. The opposite party insurance company even obtained the consent letter Ex.OPB from the complainant for settlement of his claim @ Rs.4,88,000/- on nett of salvage basis. So even after obtaining the consent letter from the complainant and receipt of report of surveyor long back the opposite party insurance company has failed to decide the claim of the complainant till date. The only ground on which the claim is said to have not been decided by opposite party insurance company is that the verification report of the above said driving license has not been obtained so far but even verification report Ex.C8 have been produced by the complainant. So even this ground no longer survive. So it is a fit case where the opposite party insurance company should be directed to pay the agreed claim of Rs.4,88,000/- on nett of salvage basis to the complainant. For delay in deciding the claim of the complainant, he is also entitled to compensation.

7. In view of above discussion, the present complaint is accepted and opposite party insurance company is directed to pay Rs.4,88,000/- to the complainant as claim amount on nett of salvage basis alongwith 9% per annum interest from the date of filing of the present complaint till the date of payment. The complainant is also awarded Rs.15,000/- as compensation and further Rs.3000/- on account of litigation expenses. Copies of the order be sent to the parties free of costs under rules. File be consigned to the record room.

Dated Parminder Sharma Jyotsna Thatai Jaspal Singh Bhatia

28.04.2015 Member Member President