DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

PATIALA.

                                      Consumer Complaint No. 41 of 9.2.2018

                                      Decided on:         3.3.2021

Ms.Avinash Mittal aged 38 years d/o Sh.Avtar Krishan Mittal R/o House No.24, Sector 33-A, Chandigarh, now resident of H.No.40, New Lal Bagh Colony, Patiala

                                                                   …………...Complainant

                                      Versus

1. National Insurance Company Ltd., Branch Office, Cinema Road, Nabha, District Patiala through its Branch Manager.
2. National Insurance Company Ltd.,Divisonal office Leela Bhawan Market, Patiala through its Divisional Manager.
3. National Insurance Company Ltd.,Registered Office 03, Middleton Street , Post Box No.9229, Kolkatta-700071 through its Managing Director/General manager/Authorized Signatory.

                                                                   …………Opposite Parties

                                      Complaint under Section 12 of the

                                      Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

QUORUM

                                      Sh. Jasjit Singh Bhinder, President

                                      Sh.Y.S.Matta, Member 

ARGUED BY

                                       Sh.Dhiraj Puri, counsel for complainant.

                                      Sh.Amit Gupta, counsel for OPs.

 ORDER

                                      JASJIT SINGH BHINDER,PRESIDENT

1. This is the complaint filed by Avinash Mittal    (hereinafter referred to as the complainant) against National Insurance Company Ltd. and others (hereinafter referred to as the OP/s) .

Facts of the complaint

2. Briefly the case of the complainant is that she got insured her Maruti Swift Dzire car bearing registration No.CH-01AN-2413 with OP No.1 vide policy No.401407/31/15/6100001911 for the period from 7.3.2016 to 6.3.2017 and paid the premium of Rs.7477/- with includes the nil depreciation premium of Rs.3372.54.
3. It is averred that on 25.2.2017 the vehicle met with an accident. The complainant informed the OPs and also submitted claim form dated 28.2.2017 with them. OPs appointed Sh.Sandeep Puri, loss assessor/surveyor to get the estimate of damaged vehicle. The complainant got repaired the vehicle in question from the authorized service centre, at Focal Point, Patiala and paid Rs.21,890/- in cash to Hira Automobiles against the receipts dated 11.3.2017 and 18.3.2017.Complainant deposited all the relevant documents with the OPs. But to the utter surprise of the complainant the OPs passed the claim only to the extent of Rs.12,300/- and deposited the same in her account on 29.3.2017.The complainant approached the OPs number of times for the claim of full amount but no heed was paid by the OPs. Complainant also got sent legal notice dated 4.9.2017 upon the OPs which was replied vide reply dated 2.10.2017 but did not pay full amount.There is deficiency in service on the part of the OPs which caused mental agony and harassment to the complainant. Hence this complaint with the prayer to accept the same by giving direction to the OPs to  pay a sum of Rs.9590/- alongwith interest @12% per annum from the date of accident; to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation for causing harassment and mental agony; to pay Rs.25000/- for committing deficiency in service and unfair trade practice and also to pay Rs.11000/- as litigation expenses.

Reply/written statement

4. Notice of the complaint was given to the OPs who appeared through counsel and contested the complaint by filing written reply having raised preliminary objections that the complainant has purchased the insurance policy of the vehicle in question strictly subject to the terms and conditions of the policy; that on receiving intimation on 28.2.2017 surveyor was appointed to assess the loss who after assessing the loss to the tune of Rs.12,300/-submitted his report dated 10.3.2012 and this amount was duly paid and nothing more is payable .Thus there is no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs.
5. On merits, the OPs reiterated the facts as raised in the preliminary objections, the contents of which are not repeated for the sake of brevity. The OPs after denying all other averments have prayed for the dismissed of the complaint.
6.  
6. In support of the complaint, the ld.counsel for the complainant has tendered in evidence Ex.CA affidavit of the complainant alongwith documents Exs.C1 to C19 and closed the evidence.
7. On the other hand, the ld. counsel for the OPs has tendered in evidence Ex.OPA affidavit of Sandeep Puri, surveyor, Ex.OPB affidavit of Prabhjot Singh, Sr.Branch Manager of OPs alongwith documents Exs.OP1 to OP5 and closed the evidence.
8. We have heard the ld. counsel for the parties and have also gone through the record of the case, carefully.
9.  
9. The ld. counsel for the complainant has argued that the complainant had purchased a policy from the OP No.1 for his Maruti Dzire car. The ld. counsel further argued that the same was insured from the OPs from 7.3.2016 to 6.3.2017 and premium was paid. The ld. counsel further argued that on 25.2.2017 the vehicle met with an accident and complainant gave the intimation to the OPs.The ld. counsel further argued that the OPs appointed Sh.Sandeep Puri as surveyor and the complainant got repaired the vehicle from Hira Automobile .The ld. counsel further argued that only the claim of Rs.12300/- was credited and the remaining amount of Rs.9590/- was not credited, so the complaint be allowed.
10. On the other hand, the ld. counsel for the OPs has argued that the surveyor as assessed the loss of Rs.12300/- against the bill of Rs.21890/- and nothing is due, so the complaint be dismissed.
11. To prove this case Ms.Avinash Mittal has tendered her affidavit,Ex.CA and she has deposed as per her complaint,Ex.C1 is policy, Ex.C2 is claim form,Ex.C3 is job card of total amount of Rs.21,890/-, in this job card the entire spare parts which have been changed are mentioned.Ex.C4 is receipt of Hira Automobiles Ltd. of Rs.10,000/-,Ex.C5 is receipt of Rs.11890/- of Hira Automobiles. So it is proved that Rs.21890/-was paid to Hira Automobiles,Ex.C6 is legal notice,Exs.C7 & C8 are the postal receipts,Ex.C9 is reply to legal notice,Exs.C10 to C19 are  photographs.
12. On behalf of OPs Sh.Sandeep Puri, surveyor has tendered his affidavit, Ex.OPA, Sh.Prabhjot Singh, Sr.Branch Manager has tendered his affidavit, Ex.OPB who has deposed as per the written statement, Ex.OP1 is insurance policy, Ex.OP2 is intimation letter, Ex.OP3 is motor insurance claim form, Ex.OP4 is surveyor report, Ex.OP5 is reply to legal notice.
13. As per the surveyor report total loss has been assessed as Rs.12300/-.The two receipts of Hira Automobiles on the file show that vide Ex.C4 it received Rs.10,000/-and vide Ex.C5 Rs.11890/-. So it  is clear that total amount of Rs.21890/-has been paid and the bill Ex.C3 is already on the file to show that the spare parts for Rs.21890/- were changed. The OPs for the reasons best known to them had only passed the claim of Rs.12300/-.
14. So due to our above discussion and due to voluminous  evidence lead by the complainant , the complaint stands allowed and the OPs are directed to pay the remaining amount of Rs.9590/- to the complainant alongwith interest @6% per annum from March/2017, when the complainant made the payments to Hira Automobiles .The OPs are also directed to pay Rs.10,000/- as compensation and further Rs.10,000/-as costs of litigation. Compliance of the order be made by the  OPs within a period of 45 days from the date of the receipt of the certified copy of this order.

ANNOUNCED

DATED:3.3.2021         

                                            Y.S.Matta                    Jasjit Singh Bhinder

                                             Member                                       President