Haryana

Yamunanagar

CC/756/2011

M/s Khanna Automobiles - Complainant(s)

Versus

New India Assurance Co. - Opp.Party(s)

Seema Sehgal

11 May 2016

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, YAMUNA   NAGAR

                                                                                          Complaint No. 756  of  2011.

                                                                                          Date of institution: 19.07.2011

                                                                                          Date of decision: 11.05.2016.

M/s Khanna Automobiles Chhachhrauli Road, Jagadhri, District Yamuna Nagar through its proprietor/partner, Haryana.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          …Complainant.

                                    Versus

 

1. The New India Assurance Co. Branch Yamuna Nagar through Branch Manager.
2. The New India Assurance Co. Branch near  Sadar Police Station Bahadurgarh through Branch Manager.
3. The New India Assurance Co. The New India Assurance Building 87, Mahatma Gandhi Marg Forte, Mumbai through Managing Director.

                                                                                                                                         … Respondents.

                       

BEFORE          SH. ASHOK KUMAR GARG, PRESIDENT

                        SH. S.C.SHARMA, MEMBER.

 

Present: None for complainant.   

              Sh. Karnesh Sharma, Advocate, counsel for respondents. 

 

ORDER

 

1.                     Complainant filed this complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986, praying therein that the respondents (hereinafter referred as OPs) be directed to make the remaining payment of Rs. 13,248/- alongwith interest on account of damage of show room glass and further to pay compensation as well as litigation expenses.

2.                     Brief facts of the present complaint, as alleged by the complainant, are that the complainant firm got insured the plate glass fitted in the show room building from the OPs Insurance Company vide Insurance Policy No. 353802/46/09/26/00000087 dated 10.07.2009 valid up to 11.07.2010 for a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- and paid a premium of Rs. 662/-. On 03.03.2010, in an incident, the plate glass of the show room of complainant broke and immediately the complainant intimated the OPs Insurance Company. OPs Insurance Company deputed the surveyor who assessed the loss to the tune of Rs. 7819/- and submitted his report dated 10.-07.2010. After that the Ops insurance Company processed the claim papers and paid a sum of Rs. 8800/- vide cheque No. 333073 dated 30.11.2010 out of Rs. 22048/- as per bill dated 02.06.2010 which is totally wrong and illegal. In this way, the OPs are liable to pay the remaining amount of Rs. 13248/- alongwith interest but despite so may requests complainant did not pay any heed. Hence, this complaint.

3.                     Upon notice, OPs appeared and filed its written statement by taking some preliminary objections such as complaint is not maintainable, this Forum has got no jurisdiction to try, entertain and adjudicate the present complaint, complainant has not come to this Forum with clean hands and the OPs Insurance Company has already paid a claim of Rs. 8800/- vide cheque No. 333073 dated 30.11.2010 to the complainant as assessed by the surveyor vide disbursement voucher Annexure R-1 and on merit, it has been admitted that OP No.2 had issued an insurance policy in the name of the complainant firm valid from 11.07.2009 to 10.07.2010 subject to its terms and conditions( Annexure R-2 and R-3). It has been further stated that on intimation surveyor was deputed, who submitted his report dated 10.07.2010 (Annexure R-4) and assessed a net liability of Rs. 7819/- on the Insurance Company. However, the OPs Insurance Company after processing the claim papers paid Rs. 8800/- to the complainant on 30.11.2010 as per surveyor report. Hence, there is no deficiency in service on the part of OPs. Lastly, prayed for dismissal of complaint.  

4.                     To prove the case, counsel for the complainant tendered into evidence affidavit of complainant Rohit Khanna as Annexure CW/A and documents such as Postal receipts Annexure C-1 to C-3, Photo copy of Legal Notice as Annexure C-4, Photo copy of miscellaneous receipts as Annexure C-5 & C-6, Acknowledgement Annexure C-7 & C-8, Photo copy of Insurance policy as Annexure C-9, Photo copy of bill dated 2.6.2010 amounting to Rs. 22048/- as Annexure C-10 and closed the evidence on behalf of complainant.

5.                     On the other hand, counsel for the OPs tendered into evidence Affidavit of Sh. Paramjot Singh, Surveyor & Loss Assessor as Annexure RW/A, affidavit of Sh.B.L.Jagwan Senior Divisional Manager as Annexure RW/B and documents such as Photo copy of claim disbursement voucher dated 30.11.2010 as Annexure R-1, Photocopy of insurance policy as Annexure R-2, Terms and conditions as Annexure R-3, Photo copy of surveyor report as Annexure R-4 and closed the evidence on behalf of OPs.

6.                     We have heard the learned counsel for the OPs and have gone through the pleadings as well as documents placed on file very minutely and carefully.

7.                     The only plea of the complainant is that on 03.03.2010 in an incident, the plate glass of the Show Room of complainant broke down and he got fitting the same and spent a sum of Rs. 22048/- whereas the OPs paid only a sum of Rs. 8800/- vide cheque No. 333073 dated 30.1.2010, out of Rs. 22048/- and the OPs are liable to pay the remaining balance amount of Rs. 13,248/-.         

8.                     After hearing both the parties, we are of the considered view that there is a deficiency in service on the part of OPs Insurance Company as the OPs Insurance Company paid the assessed amount of Rs. 8800/- on 30.11.2010 which is evident from the claim disbursement voucher Annexure R-1 to the complainant firm after a period of about 9 months from the date of alleged incident dated 3.3.2010 whereas it is a settled law that the claim of the claimants should be settled preferably within a period of maximum three (3) months. Further, we have perused the surveyor report Annexure R-4 in which the surveyor has assessed the loss as Rs. 9069/-, after deducting the salvage value at the rate of 20% i.e. Rs. 1955 but in the column of liability surveyor has mentioned the net liability of Rs. 7819/-. No clarification has been given by the Surveyor in his report as well as affidavit tendered by him whereas OPs Insurance Company paid Rs.8800/- instead of Rs.7819/- as assessed by the surveyor. Even, the surveyor report on account of deduction at the rate of 20% as Salvage value has also no weightage as no any evidence has been filed by the surveyor as well as the OPs Insurance Company that in fact the complainant has used the broken glass in any manner or sold the same in the market. The amount assessed by the surveyor as well as amount paid by the insurance Company is totally contradictory and no plausible and reasonable cause has been disclosed by the OPs Insurance Company in settling the claim of the complainant. Although it is settled law that credence should be given to the surveyor report, however, in the present case there are ambiguity in the report, so, we are of the view that the complainant is entitled to get some relief on account of difference in assessing the loss minus actual paid amount and further on account of delay in settlement of the claim.

9.                     In the circumstances noted above, we are of the considered view that the above noted acts and conduct of the Ops clearly constitute the deficiency in service on the part of OPs.

10.                   Resultantly we partly allow the complaint of complainant and direct the Ops to pay Rs. 2224/- ( Rs. 11024-8800= 2224) alongwith interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of complaint till actual realization and further to pay 5000/- as compensation for mental agony and harassment as well as Rs. 1000/- as litigation expenses. Order be complied within 30 days after preparation of copy of this order failing which complainant shall be entitled to invoke the jurisdiction of this Forum as per law. Copies of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of costs as per rules. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced: 11.05.2016.

                                                                                            

                                                                                          ( ASHOK KUMAR GARG)

                                                                                           PRESIDENT

 

 

 

                                                                                          (S.C.SHARMA)

                                                                                           MEMBER