Haryana

Kurukshetra

CC/41/2021

Jasbir Singh S/o Shiv Dayal - Complainant(s)

Versus

NIA - Opp.Party(s)

N.S.Chaudhary

21 Jun 2022

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KURUKSHETRA.

 

                                                                    Complaint No.:    41 of 2021.

                                                                   Date of institution:         29.01.2021.

                                                                   Date of decision: 21.06.2022

 

Jasbir Singh s/o Shri Shiv Dayal, r/o village Tatka, Post Office Bodla, District Kurukshetra.

                                                                                                …Complainant.

                                                     Versus

 

1. The New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Divisional Office at Old G.T. Road, Opp. Old Bus Stand, Karnal, through its Divisional Manager.
2. The New India Assurance Co. Ltd., # Bldg. 87, M.G. Road, Fort, Mumbai-400001 through its MD/CEO/Authorized Signatory.

...Respondents.

 

CORAM:   NEELAM KASHYAP, PRESIDENT.    

                   NEELAM, MEMBER.

                   ISSAM SINGH SAGWAL, MEMBER.           

 

Present:       Shri N.S. Chaudhary, Advocate for the complainant.

                   Shri Rajesh Kumar Singhal, Advocate for Opposite Party No.1.

                   Name of Opposite Party deleted.

 

ORDER:

 

1.                This is a complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

2.                It is alleged in the complaint that the complainant is the registered owner of TATA Truck Model LPS 4018 bearing Registration No.HR-65A-8059 and on 22.03.2018, he got insured the same from the OPs vide insurance policy No.32360231170100011909 for total IDV of Rs.26,50,000/- by paying premium amount of Rs.53,686/- and said insurance policy was valid from 22.03.2018 to 21.03.2019. During the tenure of aforesaid insurance policy, on 29.06.2018 in the night at about 02:00 AM, the said truck was accidently burnt at Dakor road, near Tulsi Hotel, in front of village Chandasar due to short circuit in the wiring of the cabin of said vehicle. The said incident was reported by him in the local police station Thasra vide Rapat No.26/2018 dated 27.9.2018 and office of Brough Municipality (Fire Department) had issued Fire Certificate regarding said incident. After burnt the said truck, he immediately informed to the OPs and lodged the claim with them after submitting all the requisite documents with them and requested to disburse the claim amount of Rs.26,50,000/-, but they failed to release the same. Having no another alternate, he served a legal notice dated 11.12.2020 through registered AD post to the OPs to release his claim, but after receipt of the same, the OPs failed to redress his grievance, which is an act of deficiency in service on the part of OPs, due to which, he suffered great mental agony, hardship and financial loss, constraining him to file the present complaint against the OPs.

3.                Upon notice of complaint, OPs appeared and filed their written statements raising preliminary objections regarding maintainability, locus standi, complaint is bad for mis joinder and non joinder of necessary parties. It is further stated that the claim file of complainant was closed on 27.09.2019 due to non-compliance of claim formalities and detailed letter was sent to him. The complainant failed to submit the necessary documents despite letters dated 04.4.2019, 07.5.2019, 27.5.2019 and 25.09.2019 issued by the surveyor Shri Udaiveer Singh and letters dated 19.6.2019 and 27.9.2019 by the OPs. Moreover, reply to the said legal notice was also sent on behalf of OPs, wherein, it was clearly directed to the complainant to submit the requisite documents, but he failed to do so. Therefore, the claim was not payable and prayed for dismissal the present complaint. During the pendency of the complaint, complainant moved an application for deleting the name of OP No.2 from the array of OPs, which was allowed vide order dated 20.07.2021, as such, name of OP No.2 was deleted.

4.                In support to support his case, complainant tendered affidavit Ex.CW1/A along with documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-8 and closed the evidence.

5.                On the other hand, the OPs tendered affidavit Ex.RW1/A along with documents Ex.R-1 to Ex.R-8 and closed their evidence.

6.                We have heard the learned counsel of the parties and carefully gone through the case file.

7.                Learned counsel for the complainant argued that the complainant was the registered owner of TATA Truck Model LPS 4018 and got insured the same from the OPs on 22.03.2018, vide insurance policy for total IDV of Rs.26,50,000/-w.e.f. 22.03.2018 to 21.03.2019. He further argued that during the tenure of aforesaid insurance policy, on 29.06.2018, in the night at about 02:00 AM, the said truck was accidently burnt at Dakor road, near Tulsi Hotel, in front of village Chandasar due to short circuit in the wiring of the cabin of said vehicle. The said incident was reported by the complainant in the local police station Thasra vide Rapat No.26/2018 dated 27.9.2018 and office of Brough Municipality (Fire Department) had issued Fire Certificate regarding said incident. After burnt the said truck, the complainant immediately informed to the OPs and lodged the claim with them after submitting all the requisite documents and requested to disburse the claim amount of Rs.26,50,000/-, but they failed to release the same. Having no another alternate, the complainant served a legal notice dated 11.12.2020 through registered AD post to the OPs to release his claim, but after receipt of the same, the OPs failed to redress his grievance, which is an act of deficiency in service on the part of OPs.

8.                The learned counsel for OPs argued that the claim file of complainant was closed on 27.09.2019 due to non-compliance of claim formalities and detailed letter was sent to him. The complainant failed to submit the necessary documents despite letters dated 04.4.2019, 07.5.2019, 27.5.2019 and 25.09.2019 issued by the surveyor Shri Udaiveer Singh and letters dated 19.6.2019 and 27.9.2019 by the OPs. Moreover, reply to the said legal notice was also sent on behalf of OPs, wherein, it was clearly directed to the complainant to submit the requisite documents, but he failed to do so. Therefore, the claim was not payable and prayed for dismissal the present complaint.

9.                There is no dispute between the parties that the complainant was the registered owner of truck in question vide Registration Certificate Ex.C4 & Ex.C5 and the said truck was insured with the OPs from 22.03.2018 to 21.03.2019 for IDV of Rs.26,50,000/-, vide insurance policy Ex.C-3/Ex.R-1. There is also no dispute that on 29.06.2018, the said truck was accidentally burnt and the matter was reported to the Thasra Police Station, vide Certificate Ex.C-1 and office of the Brough Municipality (Fire Department) issued Fire Certificate in this regard to the complainant. The complainant informed to the OPs about this incident, who appointed Udaiveer Singh & Associates, Surveyor & Loss Assessor to investigate the matter, who submitted his Motor Final Survey Report dated 13.06.2019 Ex.R8, assessing the net loss in the sum of Rs.20,98,500/-, on NET of Salvage Loss basis, subject to submissions of requisite documents by the complainant with the OPs.

10.              The grievance of the complainant is that he submitted all the requisite documents with the OPs regarding his claim, but they failed to release his claim. On the other hand, the OPs contended that the complainant failed to supply the requisite documents with them despite repeated requests and ultimately, his claim was closed as ‘No Claim’. But it is pertinent to mention here that during the pendency of this complaint, the complainant had supplied all the remaining requisite documents to the OPs even in the presence of this Commission. Moreover, from the submission of Survey Report dated 13.06.2019 Ex.R8, by the surveyor, it is evident that the complainant might have had submitted the requisite documents with the OPs/surveyor, on the basis of which, the said surveyor got conducted the investigation in this case and submitted its survey report Ex.R-8, but inspite of that, till today, the OPs failed to release/settle the claim of the complainant, as assessed by the surveyor, which is an act of gross deficiency in service, on the part of the OPs.  

11.              Now the question which arises for consideration is what should be the quantum of indemnification. From the perusal of Motor Final Survey Report dated 13.06.2019 Ex.R8, it is evident that the Surveyor assessed the net loss in the sum of Rs.20,98,500/- on NET of Salvage Loss basis. The surveyor is an independent person. In the present case, the report of the surveyor is well explained and detailed one as well as based on cogent and convincing material and data. No evidence was produced by the complainant on the record, to rebut the said report of the surveyor Ex.R-8. In this regard, our view is fully supported by the case law titled United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Deen Dayal, II (2009) CPJ, 45 (NC), the Hon’ble National Commission has held that the surveyor’s report being important document cannot be brushed aside lightly without any material to contrary on record.

12.              Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the considered view that the OPs are liable to indemnify the complainant for the loss, as assessed by the surveyor to the tune of Rs.20,98,500/- on NET of Salvage Loss basis, along with the compensation amount and litigation expenses.

13.              In view of our above discussion, we accept the present complaint and direct the OPs to pay the sum of Rs.20,98,500/- on NET of Salvage Loss basis (as assessed by the surveyor vide its report Ex.R-8) to the complainant. The OPs are also directed to pay Rs.15,000/-, to the complainant, as compensation for mental agony and physical harassment, caused to the complainant, due to deficiency in services on the part of the OPs, along with Rs.5,000/- as litigation expenses. The OPs are further directed to make the compliance of this order within a period of 45 days from the date of preparation of certified copy of this order, failing which, the award amount of Rs.20,98,500/- shall carry interest @6% simple per annum, from the date of this order, till its actual realization and the complainant will be at liberty to initiate proceedings under Section 71/72 of the Act against the OPs. Certified copy of this order be supplied to the parties concerned, forthwith, free of cost as permissible under Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the record-room, after due compliance.

Announced in open Commission:

Dated:21.06.2022.

 

    

                                                                                        (Neelam Kashyap)               

(Neelam)                    (Issam Singh Sagwal)                   President,

Member.                    (Member).                                     DCDRC, Kurukshetra.           
 

 

 

Typed by: Sham Kalra, Stenographer.