Haryana

StateCommission

A/296/2016

SANDEEP KUMAR - Complainant(s)

Versus

NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. - Opp.Party(s)

D.K.SINGAL

10 May 2016

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA, PANCHKULA

                                                 

First Appeal No  :    296 of 2016

Date of Institution:   08.04.2016

Date of Decision :    10.05.2016

 

 

Sandeep Kumar son of Ram Karan, resident of Anaj Mandi, Pehowa, Tehsil Pehowa, District Kurukshetra.

                                      Appellant-Complainant

 

Versus

 

1.      New India Insurance Company Limited, Grand House, G.T. Road, Shahbad, through its Branch Manager.

 

2.      Samta Hyundai through its General Manager/Proprietor, 119/8, Milestone, G.T. Road, Karnal.

Respondents-Opposite Parties

 

 

CORAM:             Hon’ble Mr. Justice Nawab Singh, President.

                             Shri B.M. Bedi, Judicial Member.

                                                                                                                   

Present:              Shri Ammish Goel, Advocate for appellant.

 

                                                   O R D E R

 

NAWAB SINGH J.(ORAL)

 

This complainant’s appeal is directed against the order dated February 26^th, 2016 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Kurukshetra (for short ‘the District Forum’) in Consumer Complaint No.452 of 2009.  

2.      A car bearing No.HR41A-6700 owned by Sandeep Kumar-complainant met with an accident on September 29^th, 2006.  The car was insured with New India Insurance Company Limited-opposite party No.1 (for short, ‘Insurance Company’). The Insurance Company was informed on the next day, that is, September 30^th, 2006.  The complainant filed claim before the Insurance Company. The Insurance Company immediately approved claim of Rs.1,79,500/- on the basis of total loss as assessed by the surveyor with the condition that the complainant would submit documents viz. transfer of Registration Certificate in the name of insurer, letter of subrogation, original keys and to hand over the damaged car.  The complainant instead of submitting the documents filed the present complaint before the District Forum.

3.      The District Forum vide impugned order directed the Insurance Company to pay Rs.1,79,500/- to the complainant, claimed by the complainant. 

4.      By filing the present appeal, the only prayer made by the complainant is that he should have been granted interest on the awarded amount. Since the Insurance Company was ready to make the payment to the complainant at the initial stage, so, there was no deficiency in service on the part of Insurance Company.  Rather it was the complainant, who did not complete the formalities with the Insurance Company.  Thus the District Forum was justified in not granting interest on the amount awarded. The appeal is therefore dismissed.

 

Announced 10.05.2016

(B.M. Bedi) Judicial Member

(Nawab Singh) President

 

 

 

 

UK