BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BHIWANI.
Complaint No.:135 of 2014.
Date of Institution: 16.05.2014.
Date of Decision:21.07.2016
Dilbagh, aged 24 years, son of Sh. Udey Ram, resident of village Badesra, Tehsil & District Bhiwani.
….Complainant.
Versus
National Insurance Co. Ltd., having its Registered office at 3 Middleton Street, Kolkata and one of its Branch at Clock Tower, Bhiwani through its Branch Manager.
…...Opposite Party.
COMPLAINT U/S 12 OF CONSUMER PROECTION ACT
BEFORE: - Shri Rajesh Jindal, President
Ms. Anamika Gupta, Member
Mrs. Sudesh, Member
Present:- Shri R.L. Ranga, Advocate, for complainant.
Shri Satender, Advocate Proxy Counsel for
Shri A. Sardana, Advocate for OP.
ORDER:-
Rajesh Jindal, President:
The case of the complainant in brief, is that he is owner of Three Wheeler No. HR-61-7654 and the same was insured with the Opposite Party vide insurance policy bearing No. 420303/31/07/6300003068 which was valid from 22.01.2008 to 21.01.2009. It is alleged that on 10.12.2008 the aforesaid vehicle was parked near the house of the complainant and the vehicle was badly damaged in the night by Suresh & others. It is alleged that the matter was reported to the police and FIR No. 230 dated 10.12.2008 under Section 323/341/148/149 IPC was registered in police station, Bawani Khera against Suresh & others and the police took the possession of the damaged three wheeler and got it mechanical examination reveals damages in the three wheeler. It is alleged that the matter of causing the damages to the insured vehicle was reported to the respondent company on 12.12.2008 and the respondent company directed that the vehicle would be inspected by the surveyor only on receipt of the report of mechanical examination duly stamped by the police and the claim for damages would be lodged and settled thereafter. The complainant further alleged that after completion of all the formalities the claim was submitted with the Opposite Party for making payment of insured amount but to no avail. Hence, it amounts to deficiency in service on the part of opposite party and as such, he had to file the present complaint for seeking compensation.
2. On appearance, the OP filed written statement alleging therein that the complaint is pre-mature in as much as the complainant failed to supply the requisite documents to the OP. It is submitted that the complainant did not inform the respondent about the alleged incident and did not lodge any claim before filing the earlier claim. Hence, in view of the facts and circumstances mentioned above, there is no deficiency in service on the part of opposite party and complaint of the complainant is liable to be dismissed with costs.
3. In order to make out his case, the complainant has placed on record Annexure C1 to Annexure C-23 alongwith supporting affidavit.
4. In reply thereto, the counsel for opposite party placed on record Annexure R1 to Annexure R-8 alongwith supporting affidavit.
5. We have gone through the record of the case carefully and have heard the learned counsel for the parties.
6. Learned counsel for the complainant reiterated the contents of the complaint. He submitted that the complainant, previously had filed a complaint before this learned District Forum and vide order dated 10.09.2013 the said complaint was disposed off with the direction to the complainant to submit the necessary documents to the respondents within 15 days and the respondents were directed to settle the claim of the complainant within 45 days from the receipt of documents. He submitted that the complainant had submitted the entire documents vide letter dated 16.09.2013 to the Ops and the complainant also furnished other documents vide his letter dated 05.10.2013 in response to the letter dated 25.09.2013 of the OP. The complainant also furnished the further documents vide his letter dated 21.10.2013. He submitted that the OP has failed to settle the claim of the complainant despite furnishing of documents by the complainant to the OP.
7. Learned counsel for the OP reiterated the contents of the reply. He submitted that the complainant has failed to furnish all the required documents. The complainant also did not produce the vehicle in question for the inspection by his surveyor deputed by the OP.
8. In the light of the pleadings and arguments of the parties, we have examined the relevant material on record. The complainant has made a claim of Rs. 22,952/- for the damage of his vehicle caused in a quarrel between the complainant and his neighbor. The FIR No. 230 dated 10.12.2008 Annexure C-18 was also registered in this regard with the concerned police station. The police mechanic report of the Three Wheeler in question is Annexure C-19. Considering the said documents, we partly allow the complaint of the complainant and award a sum of Rs. 5,000/- as compensation to the complainant against the OP. The OP is directed to pay the said amount to the complainant within 30 days from the date of passing of this order. The OP is directed to pay the said award of amount to the complainant through draft and the same be sent to the complainant through registered post. If the OP failed to comply with this order, the OP shall be liable to pay the interest @ 8 per cent per annum till the date of payment. Certified copies of the order be sent to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room, after due compliance.
Announced in open Forum.
Dated: 21.07.2016.
(Rajesh Jindal)
President,
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum, Bhiwani.
(Anamika Gupta) (Sudesh)
Member Member
