Present (1) Nisha Nath Ojha,
District & Sessions Judge (Retd.) President
(2) Smt. Karishma Mandal,
Member
Date of Order : 31.10.2016
Nisha Nath Ojha
- In the instant case the Complainant has sought for following reliefs against the Opposite party:-
- To direct the opposite parties to pay the claim amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- ( Rs. Five Lakh only ).
- The facts of this case lies in a narrow compass which is as follows:-
It is the case of the complainant that he purchased a Mahindra Diesel Maxi Taxi vehicle on 01.04.1986 vide annexure – 2 from Lolly & Sen Company after taking loan of Rs. 1,00,000/- from Punjab National Bank. The aforesaid vehicle was under hypothecation with Punjab National Bank, Imamganj, Patna. For getting the loan sanction from Punjab National Bank the complainant has fixed Rs. 25,000/- after selling his land and thereafter the Bank has sanctioned Rs. 1,00,000/- to him. At the time of getting the loan Matric certificate and other relevant documents were deposited in the Bank. After getting the chasis of the vehicle it was sent to Lal Babu Body Builder, Kankarbagh for making body for which two months time were given by the body builder. On 01.05.2006 the complainant met an accident due to which his knee was broken and thereafter the complainant began to get the aforesaid vehicle driven by driver namely Md. Iqbaal.
It is the further case of the complainant that on 13.03.1989 his Mahindra Maxi Taxi bearing registration no. BHB 3272 collided with a bus bearing no. 5635 in village Mahariya due to whichhis vehicle got damaged. Thereafter, the branch manager of Punjab National Bank was informed and he requested the Punjab National Bank to issue a letter to enable him to inform the insurance company with regard to repairing of his vehicle. Thereafter the Punjab National Bank gave him a letter in which a request was made to get the vehicle examined and thereafter one Amrendra Kumar surveyor came firstly. The aforesaid Amrendra Kumar surveyed the vehicle and demanded relevant papers from complainant and the complainant gave all the relevant paper to Amrendra Kumar who directed the complainant to take the vehicle to body builder. The complainant thereafter brought the aforesaid vehicle to Navratan Body Builder, Kankarbagh. Thereafter, second surveyor Anil Kumar came who after examining the vehicle directed the complainant to get the aforesaid vehicle repaired and stated that the cost incurred on repair will be sent to Bank. The complainant had paid Rs. 25,000/- on the repairing of the aforesaid Maxi after selling his land. After the accident the FIR was lodged in Shantipuram Piket, Paliganj and all the relevant papers with regard to the accident of vehicle was given to the surveyor.
It is further case of the complainant that the second surveyor Anil Kumar had taken estimate with regard to money spent in repairing of the body from the body builder and assured him to inform the Bank with regard to the estimate etc. Thereafter the complainant began to use the vehicle after taking it from the body builder and he was found innocent in Paliganj P.S. case no. 65/89. Thereafter, there was Dacoiyi in the aforesaid vehicle after over powering the staff of the aforesaid vehicle and thereafter mob gathered there and damaged his vehicle by stone etc. Again FIR was instituted.
The complainant has also asserted that on 30.04.1990 and 09.07.1990 he informed the bank that his interest account be closed as his vehicle is not plying due to damage by the public and the complainant was found innocent in a case which was falsely lodged in Chandauti P.S.
The grievance of the complainant is that despite the aforesaid facts the Bank authority continued to issue notice against him and when he complained to Regional Manager of the Bank, then the regional Manager informed the Branch manager of the Bank to give a report with regard to alleged of the complainant and thereafter the Punjab National Bank, Imamganj had sent a report in April 2001. Despite the aforesaid fact the Bank has adjusted his fixed account Rs. 25,000/- towards loan.
It is the grievance of the complainant that insurance company has not paid a single amount despite the fact that his damaged vehicle was repaired after being examined by the two surveyors namely Amrendra Kumar and Anil Kumar.
On behalf of opposite party no. 1 National Insurance Company Ltd. a show cause has been filed stating that the opposite party no. 1 has been wrongly made party. In Para – 10 of the aforesaid show cause the opposite party no. 1 has asserted as follows, “that the insurance company knew about the alleged claim only on 22.03.2001 when the insurance company received a letter dated 19.03.2001 written by complainant and prior to that there was no intimation to the insurance company with regard to lodging of any claim in the insurance company. It is stated that neither the Bank nor the complainant has informed to the insurance company about the lodging of the claim.”
In Par a- 11 of show cause, opposite party no. 1 has asserted that the insurance company has replied letter on 23.03.2001 by registered post directing the complainant to give proof of lodging the claim in its office or any letter/ref. of the concerned Bank as the vehicle was under the joint name of financer and insured both. It has been asserted by opposite party no. 1 that financer Bank has not made any correspondence with regard to any claim lodged by complainant and the complainant has failed to produce any proof with regard to lodging of any claim to insurance company.
On behalf of opposite party no. 2 Punjab National Bank a written statement has been filed denying the allegation of the complainant. In Para – 8 of the aforesaid written statement it is stated that the loanee ( complainant ) has not deposited even a single installment of the loan amount and he is a willful defaulter.
We have narrated the brief facts asserted by the respective parties in the foregoing paragraphs.
It is the case of the complainant he had informed the bank etc about the accident and damage of his vehicle and thereafter two surveyors had examined his vehicle and the vehicle was repaired as per order of surveyor Anil Kumar who told the complainant that the insurance amount will be sent to Bank. The opposite party no. 2 bank asserted that the complainant had not paid a single installment after taking the loan and as such his fixed deposit was adjusted towards his loan and still the amount is due with the complainant. Opposite party no. 1 has asserted that it has no information with regard to the accident and the complainant has not given any proof with regard to his assertion. There is no reference of appointment of surveyor by the insurance company in whole of show cause. However, the opposite party no. 1 has directed the complainant to give proof of lodging of the claim in its office or any letter/ref. of the concerned Bank in this regard. Thus the opposite party no. 1 has not accepted that the complainant has lodged his claim or the Bank has lodged any claim.
In view of the aforesaid fact and circumstances we are not in a possession to record any finding with regard to deficiency on the part of opposite parties.
In view of the fact and circumstances referred above we direct the complainant to submit proof about lodging of his complaint with opposite party no. 1 so that the opposite party no. 1 may proceed with the matter in accordance with law.
The aforesaid proof such as letters, form etc. must be deposited by the complainant to opposite party no. 1 within the period of two months from the date of receipt of this order or certified copy of this order.
We also direct opposite party no. 2 to extend co-operation to the complainant in settling the claim if the complainant is able to deposit the proof of lodging the claim.
We further directed opposite party no. 1 that if the complainant submits proof of lodging of claim then the opposite party no. 1 will settle his claim in accordance with law within the period of three months from the date of receiving the such proof.
We expect that opposite party no. 1after receiving the aforesaid proof by the complainant will act promptly with compassion as the matter has been delayed.
It goes without saying that all the money realized from the insurance company shall be given to Bank towards adjustment of loan if the loan amount is due.
Thus this complaint petition disposed off in terms of the direction made above.
Member President
