Delhi

New Delhi

CC/1062/2005

Bharat Bhushan Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S. Tukish India Insurance Company Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

29 Oct 2015

ORDER

CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-VI

(DISTT. NEW DELHI), ‘M’ BLOCK, 1^STFLOOR,

VIKAS BHAWAN, I.P.ESTATE,

NEW DELHI-110002.

 

Case No.CC/1062/05                            Dated:

In the matter of:

Sh. Bharat Bhushan Singh,

CC-57 D, Shalimar Bagh, Delhi-110088

Presently at: BA-7 Gr. Floor, Shalimar Bagh

 

……..COMPLAINANT

       

VERSUS

1. Turkish India Insurance Co. Ltd.,

Room no.14, Administrative Block,

IGI Airport Terminal –II, Delhi-110037

 

2. United India Insurance Co. Ltd.,

D.O 3, /DAB, 60 Janpath, New Delhi-01

 

                                         ……. OPPOSITE PARTIES

 

 

ORDER

President: C.K Chaturvedi

               

The Complainant as an Exhibitor has booked a stall in a Exhibition to be held at Frankfurt from 01.11.03 to 09.11.03. He booked his luggage with OP1 Turkish Airlines. He also got the luggage documents and other items of exhibitions covered under policy covering risk of loss from OP2, valid for 35 days. He travelled but his luggage did not reach Frankfurt. He could not participate and expenses for booking went waste. The Airlines accepted the loss of baggage and offered Rs.17,900/- on 03.09.04 based on weight of lost baggage. The Complainant accepted with protest. The OP2 however, did not pay for the insured amount and it sought documents of proof of loss of baggage, the amount received from OP1. The list of items lost with receipt of goods lost. Not finding any response, this complaint is filed.

We have summarily considered the claim, and perused the replies of OP2, as complainant dropped OP1 from the complaint. The OP2 states that M/s. Heritage Health Services, through which he took the policy asked the complainant to give some information, vide its letter of 27.01.04, which he did not give.

 On going through the material on record, we find that OP2 has not denied the policy. The fact of loss of luggage is proved by payment for loss made by OP1. In such circumstances, OP2 pleading more information of clerical nature from complainant cannot be appreciated.

It has not shown a single letter written by OP2 to complainant about the claim’s process for insured amount. This is clear deficiency on the part of OP2, in the light of admitted facts. We direct OP2 to process the claim and make payment of insured amount of Rs.46,000/- as insured amount. We also award a lump sum compensation of Rs.50,000/- for deficiency, interest & litigation expenses of last 15 years.

The order shall be complied with within 30 days of the receipt of the copy of the order; otherwise action can be taken against OP under Section 25 / 27 of the Consumer Protection Act.

File be consigned to record room.

Copy of the order be sent to the parties free of cost.

 

        Pronounced in open Court on 29.10.2015.

 

 

 

(C.K.CHATURVEDI)

PRESIDENT

 

 

 (Ritu Garodia)

MEMBER