Haryana

Karnal

CC/621/2019

Sukhwinder Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

National Insurance Company Limited - Opp.Party(s)

Ankit Sahni

23 Feb 2023

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KARNAL.

 

                                                        Complaint No. 621 of 2019

                                                        Date of instt.11.09.2019

                                                        Date of Decision:23.02.2023

 

Sukhwinder Singh son of Shri Bir Singh, resident of VPO Baisal, tehsil Nilokheri, District Karnal. Mobile no.435295908003.

 

                                               …….Complainant.

                                              Versus

 

1.     National Insurance Company limited, Dhanwant Building, G.T. Road, Karnal, through its Branch Manager.

 

2.     Jatin Sahni, Surveyor, resident of house no.95-A, Jarnaily Colony, Karnal.

                                                                      …..Opposite Parties.

 

Complaint Under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and after amendment Under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

 

Before   Sh. Jaswant Singh……President.

              Shri Vineet Kaushik……Member

      Dr. Rekha Chaudhary…….Member

                   

Argued by: Shri Ankit Sahni, counsel for complainant

                   Shri Sudershan Patlan, counsel for the OPs.

 

                    (Jaswant Singh President)

 

ORDER:   

                

                The complainant has filed the present complaint Under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as after amendment under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the opposite parties (hereinafter referred to as ‘OPs’) on the averments that complainant got insured his Fabia  Car Make Skoda bearing registration no.HR-05-AD-1518 with the OPs, vide policy no.401703061027, valid from 25.07.2017 to 24.07.2018. On 20.12.2017 the said vehicle was coming from Muradabad to Karnal  and when it reached ahead of Muradabad, a truck was standing on the road and headlight of a vehicle coming from opposite side fell on the eyes of the driver of car, due to which the car struck against the said standing truck and car roamed around and vehicle coming from backside hit the aforesaid car in its right side and thereafter said car was brought to workshop of Bhatia motors I.T.I chowk, Karnal. An intimation in this regard was sent to the OPs and on receipt of intimation, OPs appointed a surveyor for assessment of the loss. An estimate of Rs.7,46,404/- was furnished by Bhatia Motors alongwith requisite documents i.e. claim form, copy of driving licence, registration certificate etc. as per the instruction of the OP no.1, OP no.2 had visited the workshop of Bhatia Motors and took photographs of the vehicle and also discussed about the loss to the vehicle. After waiting for a sufficient long time, complainant visited the office of OP no.1 and enquired about the status of the claim but official of OP no.1 told that OP no.2 has not submitted report and in the absence of survey report, the claim cannot be processed by the company. Thereafter, complainant approached the OP no.2 and requested him to submit the his report with the company but OP no.2 did not pay any heed to the request of complainant and lingered the matter on one pretext or the other. As per the norms of IRDAI, OP no.2 was required to submit his report to the insurer, as expeditiously as possible, but not later than 30 days of his appointment as surveyor, but even after the expiry of about one and half year, OP no.2 did not bother to submit his report with the company and due to non-submission of report the claim of the complainant could not be processed by the OP no.1. Furthermore, OP no.1 also did not direct the OP no.2 to submit his report within a stipulated period of time. Then complainant sent a legal notice dated 25.09.2018 to the OPs but it also did not yield any result.  On 06.03.2019, complainant got inspected the said car from one independent surveyor namely Er. J.K. Sharma, Automobile Engineer and he had minutely inspected the loss and damages to the said car and also took the photographs of said car to depict the loss and damage caused to the said car. Thereafter, said surveyor gave his detailed report dated 12.03.2019 to the complainant. Non-submission of the report by the OP no.2 to the OP no.1 is clear deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs. Hence this complaint.

2.             On notice, OPs appeared and filed its written version raising preliminary objections with regard to maintainability; cause of action; locus standi and concealment of true and material facts. On merits, it is pleaded that the policy is not of Zero Depth, rather it is a depreciable policy and moreover, the complainant is liable to pay 40% of metal parts and 50% on plastic parts of accidental vehicle. The complainant has not followed the instructions of the insurance policy. The Insured Declared Value of said vehicle is Rs.3,50,000/-. If repair value of said vehicle comes to 75% then said vehicle is treated as total loss but in the present case as per the estimate prepared by the surveyor of company, there is loss to the tune of Rs.1,77,488/- which comes to 50-60% of total IDV. But our repair liability is not reached more than 51%, hence in view of the above facts, complaint of the complainant deserves dismissal. It is further pleaded that the complainant in collusion with Bhatia Motors got procured a false and baseless rough estimate of Rs.7,46,404/- of repairing of his damaged vehicle just to extract money from the OP no.1. The vehicle of the complainant was not totally damaged, only front wheel and bumper of driver side was damaged which is evident from photographs taken by the OP no.2 at the time of surveying the said vehicle. OP no.1 was ready to pay the reasonable repairing cost of the said vehicle of the complainant but complainant was adamant for getting aforesaid huge amount from OP no.1. OP no.2 wrote letters dated 09.04.2018 and 03.10.2018 to the complainant to contact him with all his documents so that his claim can be settled but he did not bother for same. OP no.1 also wrote letters dated 17.10.2018, 27.12.2018 and 14.01.2019 for completing the necessary claim formalities and the vehicle was not dismantled till date as confirmed by the surveyor. There is no deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs. The other allegations made in the complaint have been denied and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

3.             Parties then led their respective evidence.

4.             Learned counsel for complainant has tendered into evidence affidavit of complainant Ex.CW1/A, copy of claim intimation report Ex.CW1, copy of insurance cover note Ex.CW2, copy of estimate Ex.CW3, copy of registration certificate Ex.CW4 and closed the evidence on 04.01.2022 by suffering separate statement.

5.             On the other hand, learned counsel for OPs has tendered into evidence reminders dated 09.04.2018, 03.10.2018, 17.10.2018, 17.10.2018 and 27.12.2018 Ex.OP1 to Ex.OP5, copy of report of surveyor dated 31.12.2018 Ex.OP5, copy of claim closed notice dated 14.01.2019 Ex.OP6, copy of Motor Survey report dated 31.12.2018 Ex.OP7, copy of insurance policy Ex.OP8, coloured photos of car in all aspects Ex.OP9 and closed the evidence on 01.09.2022 by suffering separate statement.

6.             We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record available on the file carefully.

7.             Learned counsel for the complainant, while reiterating the contents of complaint, has vehemently argued that complainant got insured his vehicle in question from the OP no.1. On 20.12.2017 the said vehicle was met with an accident. The car was brought to workshop of Bhatia motors I.T.I chowk, Karnal. An intimation in this regard was also sent to the OPs and on receipt of intimation, OPs appointed a surveyor for assessment of the loss. An estimate of Rs.7,46,404/- was furnished by Bhatia Motors. OP no.2 did not submit his report with OP no.1 after the expiry of about one and half year. Due to non-submission of report the claim of the complainant could not be processed by the OP no.1. On 06.03.2019, complainant got inspected the said car from one independent surveyor Er. J.K. Sharma, Automobile Engineer and he had inspected the loss and damages to the said car and gave his detailed report dated 12.03.2019 to the complainant and lastly prayed for allowing the complaint.

8.             Per contra, learned counsel for the OPs, while reiterating the contents of written version, has vehemently argued that the policy is not of Zero Depth, rather it is a depreciable policy and the complainant is liable to pay 40% of metal parts and 50% on plastic parts of accidental vehicle. The Insured Declared Value of said vehicle is Rs.3,50,000/-. The surveyor has assessed the loss to the tune of Rs.1,77,488/-. He further argued that complainant in collusion with Bhatia Motors got procured a false and baseless rough estimate of Rs.7,46,404/- of repairing of his damaged vehicle just to extract money from the OP no.1. OP no.1 was ready to pay the reasonable repairing cost of the said vehicle of the complainant but complainant was adamant for getting aforesaid huge amount from OP no.1. OP no.2 wrote letters dated 09.04.2018 and 03.10.2018 to the complainant to contact him with all his documents so that his claim can be settled but he did not bother for same.  He further argued that OP no.1 also wrote letters dated 17.10.2018, 27.12.2018 and 14.01.2019 for completing the necessary claim formalities but complainant not cooperated with the surveyor to complete the necessary claim formalities. He further argued that till date the vehicle in question has not dismantled as required by the surveyor and lastly prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

9.             We have duly considered the rival contentions of the parties.

10.           Admittedly, the vehicle in question met with an accident during the subsistence of insurance policy.

11.           The claim of the complainant has not been settled due to non-cooperation of the complainant.

12.           The onus to prove its version lies upon the OPs. To prove its version, OPs placed on file, reminder Ex.OP1 dated 09.04.2018, reminder Ex.OP2 dated 03.10.2018, letters Ex.OP3 and Ex.OP4 dated 17.10.2018, letter Ex.OP5 dated 27.12.2018, letter Ex.OP6 dated 31.12.2018 and letter dated OP7 dated 14.01.2019. On perusal of the abovesaid correspondence, it has been proved that complainant has neither cooperated the OP nor allowed to dismantle the vehicle in question. As per the survey report Ex.OP8, the net loss of the vehicle is assessed Rs.1,77,488/- and IDV of the said vehicle is of Rs.3,50,000/-. Hence, the vehicle in question not comes in the preview of total loss. But complainant was adamant to settle his claim on total loss basis. Complainant has neither cooperated the OPs nor dismantled the vehicle in question for further inspection. Moreover, from the photographs Ex.OP10, it appears that vehicle in question is not totally damaged. Complainant also relied upon the survey report of Er. J.K. Sharma  but during the course of evidence, neither complainant has tendered the said report into evidence nor examined the said surveyor to prove his version. Complainant has only relied upon the claim form Ex.C1, insurance policy Ex.C2, estimate Ex.C3 prepared by Bhatia Motors and certificate of registration of vehicle Ex.C4. Complainant has miserably failed to prove his case by leading any cogent and convincing evidence. It has been proved on the file that it was the complainant who has not got settled his claim. Hence, the act of the OPs is not deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. Thus, the present complaint is devoid of merits and same deserves to be dismissed and same is hereby dismissed. No order as to costs. The parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced

Dated:23.02.2022                                   

                                                                  President,

                                                     District Consumer Disputes

                                                     Redressal Commission, Karnal.

 

(Vineet Kaushik)        (Dr. Rekha Chaudhary)

                          Member                           Member