Complainant by filing this complaint has submitted that complainant paid M/s Dewar’s Garage Insurance Agencies (P) Ltd. for a sum of Rs.1,923/- only by post-dated cheque as car insurance premium to the op through premium collector of the company who collected the cheque on 18.07.2012 and the period of insurance coverage was from 30.09.2012 to 29.09.2013.  though the premium collector on the behalf of the company collected the premium well in advance but the policy was not given delivery till the 1^st half of 06.10.2012 against the car of the complainant bearing No. WB-02/Y-6025 even after the expiry of the insurance policy as on 29.09.2012.  But the policy was received of late, on 06.10.2012 for the period from 30.09.2012 to 29.09.2013.

          Practically for non-receipt of the said policy, no tax token by Motor Vehicle Department could be issued in time in absence of valid car insurance policy for which the complainant being ailing senior citizen had to suffer a lot because of non-avaliability of her own car’s policy, as well as complainant has suffered unbearable harassment  and mental agony and also bear extra expenditure which  should be compensated.

          It is further submitted that complainant repeatedly requested to premium collector and also team-manager of the insurance agency company on and from 16.09.2012 but same went in vain but reason is best known to them.  Finding no other alternative the complainant had to make diary to Manicktala Police Station and also Hare Street Police Station for taking necessary action.  Thereafter complainant filed an application before CA&FBP for mediation and op did not care to attend the mediation on any of the 4 dates.  So, tripartite meeting arranged by the CA Department and same also went in vain and in the circumstances complainant appeared praying for necessary relief and redressal.

          Thereafter in this case notice of the complaint was sent to the op and that was duly received by the op and appeared and prayed for time to file written version.  But ultimately op did not turn up his lawyer and did not take any step.  So it was heard exparte and the Ld. Lawyer for the op Banashree Nandy was engaged by the op for conducting the case and she prayed for time for written version.  But ultimately she did not take any step.  So, the case was heard exparte.

                                                       Decision with reasons

          After hearing the Ld. Lawyer for the complainant and also considering the complaint including the receipt in support of issuing a cheque in favour of Insurance Co. through Dewar’s Garage Insurance Agencies (P) Ltd. it is clear that complainant handed over a cheque for renewing the car insurance policy for the period 2012-13 and that cheque was handed over on 28.07.2012 and that cheque was of dated 10.09.2012 and it is admitted by the complainant that his previous insurance policy was up to the period 29.09.2012 and he handed over the said post dated cheque to the agent the present op of the insurance company and insurance company issued the policy document on 06.10.2012 which was received by the complainant on 06.10.2012 and that policy was for the period 30.09.2012 to 29.09.2012.  Then it is clear that insurance company received the cheque issued valid insurance policy for the period from 30.09.2012 to 29.09.2013 continuing the previous policy because previous policy expired on 29.09.2012 and next policy started on and from 30.09.2012 ending on 29.09.2013 and it is fact that the policy document was received by the complainant on 06.10.2012 i.e. just after 6 days from the date of issuance of the policy.  So, there was no laches on the part of the insurance company.

          At the same time there is no allegation against the insurance company but the allegation against the agency who collected the said cheque on behalf of the insurance company.  Truth is that no policy can be issued prior to expiry of the previous policy.  So in this case it is clear that the above dated cheque which was received was handed over to the insurance company and insurance company after receive of that on expiry of the previous policy on 29.09.2013 issued fresh policy on and from 30.09.2012 and the policy document was received by the complainant on 06.10.2012 i.e. within 6 days from the handed over of the car insurance policy.

          So, considering that fact it is found that there is/was no laches on the part of the op agency because op handed over the cheque and insurance company promptly acted and fact remains the cheque was of dated 10.09.2012.  Probably the complainant is not aware of the fact that even if any cheque is submitted prior to issuance of any policy the cheque shall be treated as valid cheque after encashment.  Fact remains such a cheque must be tagged with the renewal application and after clearing of the said renewal application and encashment of the cheque the policy shall be treated as valid and in the present case complainant has not stated on which date that post dated cheque was encashed by the insurance company.  Whatever it may be there is no laches on the part of the present agency.  Agency discharged his duties and valid policy was handed over as renewal of the previous policy which expired on 29.09.2012 and new policy was started on 30.09.2012.  So, apparently no deficiency and negligence of the op is found. 

          Probably without considering the provision of law this complaint was filed or the complainant was misguided and filed this complaint.  In the light of the above observation we are convinced to hold that there is no merit in the complaint as complainant has failed to prove any relationship of consumer and service provider in between the parties and fact remains in this case complainant has failed to prove any deficiency or negligence on the part of the op/the insurance agency.

          Accordingly the complaint fails.

          Hence, it is

                                                               ORDERED

          That the complaint be and the same is dismissed exparte against the op.