Order dictated by:
Sh.Anoop Sharma, Presiding Member
- Balhar Singh complainant has brought the instant complaint under section 12 & 13 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 on the allegations that complainant purchased one mobile No. 98760-67771, IMI No. 8627040428439051 vide bill No. 1880 dated 2.6.2015 for a sum of Rs. 18000/- from opposite party No.3. The complainant got insured the said mobile from opposite party No.2 through opposite party No.1 by paying Rs. 1000/- and the policy number is 76524870. The mobile of the complainant fell down on 3.3.2016. Complainant lodged complaint with the Insurance company i.e. opposite party No.2 vide complaint No. 1603126953 dated 12.3.2016. The complainant lodged claim with opposite party No.2 but opposite party No.2 refused to admit the claim of the complainant. Vide instant complaint, complainant has sought for the following reliefs:-
- Opposite parties be directed to repair the mobile phone or in the alternative to replace the same with new one ;
- Compensation to the tune of Rs. 50000/- may also be granted to the complainant alongwith adequate litigation expenses.
Hence, this complaint.
2. Upon notice, opposite party No.2 appeared and filed written version taking certain preliminary objections therein inter alia that present complaint is not maintainable being premature against the answering opposite party. In the present case job card was auto closed being the complainant has never approached the service centre for its required repair ; that complainant has not approached this Forum with clean hands and has suppressed the real facts from this Forum ; that complainant has violated the terms and conditions of the policy and as per policy terms and conditions, it is necessary to call toll free customer care within 48 hours. But in the present case, complainant never informed the answering opposite party within 48 hours as per terms and conditions of the policy. On merits it was submitted that complainant intimated the answering opposite party on 12.3.2016 i.e. after 9 days from the date of incidence with his statement that “He was in his house getting down from steps, at that time he was on call, suddenly while getting down from steps accident, customer hand set slipped from his hand fell down and handset got damaged…. And (Black panel damaged)”. But the complainant never submitted the required documents within a framed time period . The complainant has concealed the true facts and has not cleared the actual reason for closed of auto job sheet. In the instant case due to the complainant fault and himself negligence and also violations of terms and conditions of the policy, the job card was auto closed. While denying and controverting other allegations, dismissal of complaint was prayed.
3. Opposite parties No.1 & 3 did not opt to put in appearance as such they were ordered to be proceeded against ex-parte.
4. In his bid to prove the case complainant tendered into evidence his duly sworn affidavit Ex.C-1, copy of bill dated 2.6.2015 Ex.C-2, copy of print out of the SMS Ex.C-3, copy of Insurance card Ex.C-4 and closed his evidence.
5. To rebut the aforesaid evidence Sh. Sanjeet Singh,Adv.counsel for opposite party No.2 tendered into evidence affidavit of Sh. Vicky Bathla,Area Manager Ex.OP2/1, copy of terms and conditions Ex.OP2/2 and closed the evidence on behalf of opposite party No.2.
6. We have heard the complainant and ld.counsel for opposite party No.2 and have carefully gone through the record on the file.
7. From the facts and circumstances of the case, it becomes evident that the complainant purchased mobile having IMI No. 8627040428439051 vide bill No. 1880 dated 2.6.2015 for Rs. 18000/- from opposite party No.3, copy of bill is Ex.C-2 on record. It was the case of the complainant that he got insured the said mobile from opposite party No.2 through opposite party No.1 by paying Rs. 1200/- and policy No. 76524870 was issued by opposite party No.2, copy of the Insurance card accounts for Ex.C-4 on record. The mobile of the complainant fell down from the hands of the complainant on 3.3.2016 and complainant lodged complaint with opposite party No.2 vide complaint No. 1603126953 dated 12.3.2016. Thereafter the complainant lodged claim with opposite party No.2, but opposite party No.2 refused the genuine claim of the complainant . However, case of the opposite party No.2 is that the complaint of the complainant is premature as the complainant has neither approached the authorized service centre for repair of the mobile handset nor submitted the documents as required by opposite party No.2. The other plea of the opposite party that the complainant has not intimated the answering opposite party within 48 hours of the incident but has lodged the complaint with answering opposite party No.2 on 12.3.2016 , whereas the date of incident was 3.3.2016. As such the complainant has violated the terms and conditions of the complainant. But, however, opposite party No.2 has not proved on record that they ever supplied the terms and conditions to the complainant as the complainant has only provided with the insurance card which the complainant has produced in evidence Ex.C-4 on record. The opposite party has failed to prove that the terms and conditions were supplied to the complainant alongwith the Insurance card as they have not produced in evidence any receipt book/register of any postal authority or courier company to prove that the terms and conditions were duly supplied to the complainant alongwith Insurance card. So the plea of the opposite party No.2 that the complainant has not lodged complaint within 48 hours as per terms and conditions of the policy, is not tenable. However, it was admitted that the complainant has lodge complaint with the opposite party No.2 on 12.3.2016, copy of the same is Ex.C-3 on record. The other plea of the opposite party that as the complainant has not submitted the required documents for assessing the admissibility of the claim , as such the claim has been rejected and closed . So it is justifiable if the complainant be directed to produce the documents as required by the opposite party for the settlement of the claim.
8. So in view of the above discussion, the complaint is disposed of with the directions to the complainant to submit the documents i.e. Three photographs of the damaged handset ( 1 photo showing IMEI Number clearly and the other 2 showing damages), photocopy of original bill on claimant’s name, KYC documents self attested photo ID proof of claimant, Insurance claim Form completely filled and duly signed by the claimant, Incident report , cancelled cheque to the opposite party No.1 within 7 days from the date of receipt of copy of order and thereafter the opposite party No.1 is directed to upload the documents on portal alongwith repair estimate for insurance approval within 15 days on receipt of the documents from the complainant and opposite party No.2 will decide the claim within further period of 30 days . Case could not be disposed of within the stipulated period due to heavy pendency of the cases in this Forum. Copies of the order be furnished to the parties free of costs. File is ordered to be consigned to the record room.
Announced in Open Forum
Dated : 11.4.2017
