BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BHIWANI.
Complaint No.:282 of 2013.
Date of Institution: 06.05.2013.
Date of Decision:06.03.2017
Inder Singh son of Shri Dodh Ram @ Dana Ram, resident of village Khawa, Post Office Bhariwas, Tehsil Tosham, District Bhiwani.
….Complainant.
Versus
National Insurance Company Limited, through its branch manager having its branch office at Circular Road, Ghantaghar, Bhiwani.
…...Opposite Party.
COMPLAINT U/S 12 OF CONSUMER PROECTION ACT.
BEFORE: - Shri Rajesh Jindal, President
Ms. Anamika Gupta, Member
Mrs. Sudesh, Member
Present:- None for the complainant.
Shri M.L. Sardana, Advocate for OP.
ORDER:-
Rajesh Jindal, President:
The case of the complainant in brief, is that he is registered owner of a tractor no. HR-48-5023 and the tractor was duly financed by Haryana Gramin bank, Ishwarwal vide registration certificate no. 0964231 & is valid till 19.05.2024. It is alleged that the tractor was met with a road side accident on 31.05.2010 during the currency of insurance policy no. 420303/31/10/6300000736 for the period from 24.05.2010 to 23.05.2011. It is alleged that the tractor was being driven by one Ramchander son of Shri Amar Chand, who was having a valid driving licence valid upto 11.04.2018 at the time of alleged accident. It is alleged that the matter of accident was reported to the OP insurer immediately after accident & a DDR dated 01.06.2010 under Section 174 Cr.P.C. was registered with police station Bahal, District Bhiwani. It is alleged that the complainant furnished all the required documents as asked by the OP in time, but in spite of elapse of more than 18 months of submitting the required documents, the OP failed to settle the claim of the complainant. The complainant further alleged that due to the act and conduct of the respondent, he had to suffer mental agony, humiliation and harassment. Hence, it amounts to deficiency in service on the part of respondent and as such he had to file the present complaint.
2. On appearance, the OP filed written statement alleging therein that the bills furnished by the complainant are fake and factitious. It is submitted that the claim of the complainant having been repudiated and he having been informed accordingly, there was no occasion for the complainant to visit the respondent company. Hence, in view of the facts and circumstances mentioned above, there is no deficiency in service on the part of opposite party and complaint of the complainant is liable to be dismissed with costs.
3. In order to make out his case, the counsel for complainant has tendered into evidence documents Annexure C-1 to Annexure C-5 alongwith supporting affidavit.
4. In reply thereto, the counsel for opposite party has tendered into evidence documents Annexure R-1 to R-12 alongwith supporting affidavit.
5. This case is pending for arguments since 25.05.2015. From the perusal of the zimini orders, we found that nobody is appearing on behalf of the complainant since 08.12.2015. Thereafter, the case has been adjourned several times but till date nobody appeared on behalf of the complainant for arguments. This is very old case of the year of 2013. We proceed to decide this case on merits. Arguments of the counsel for the OP heard.
6. Learned counsel for the OP reiterated the contents of the reply. He submitted that the claim of the complainant was repudiated because at the time of the alleged accident the driver of the vehicle was having the fake driving licence. He submitted that the complainant has submitted the driving licence of Ram Chander which was issued by RTO Agra. The OP get verified the licence from the RTO Agra. The RTO Agra vide letter dated 12.09.2011, Annexure R-12 informed that the Ram Chander son of Amar Chand driving licence No. 6110/AG/05 dated 12.04.2015 has not been issued by this office. The said RTO Agra vide letter dated 21.10.2010 Annexure R-11, informed the OP that Ram Chander son of Amar Chand, DL No. 3300/AG/07/29.06.1997 has not been issued by this office. He submitted that in view of the said reports Annexure R-11 and R-12 of the RTO Agra it stands prove that the driver of the vehicle was not having any valid driving licence and the licence of the driver submitted by the complainant to the OP was found to be fake. Therefore, the claim of the complainant has been rightly repudiated by the OP vide letter dated 21.10.2011 Annexure R-8. In support of his contention he relied upon the following judgments:-
I Tirupati Transport Corporation Versus Oriental Insurance Company Limited I (2016) CPJ 12 of Hon’ble National Commission, New Delhi.
II Ajit Prasad Jain Versus New India Assurance Co. Ltd. & Anr. II (2015) CPJ 537 of Hon’ble National Commission, New Delhi.
III Aman Rana Versus National Insurance Co. Ltd. II (2015) CPJ 656 of Hon’ble National Commission, New Delhi.
7. We have perused the record carefully. The contention of the counsel for the OP goes unrebutted. The complainant in his evidence has placed on the record the photocopy of letter dated 09.08.2010 of OP Annexure C-1, photocopy of driving licence of Ram Chander son of Amar Chand Annexure C-2, bill Annexure C3 and C-4 and RC of vehicle Annexure C-5. The photocopy of the driving licence Annexure C-2 which has been produced by the OP is bearing the licence No. 6110/AG/05 for which the OP has produced the report of RTO Agra Annexure R-12. According to the said report of RTO Agra, said licence has not been issued by their office. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, we hold that the claim of the complainant has been rightly repudiated by the OP. The complaint of the complainant is fails and is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs. Certified copies of the order be sent to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room, after due compliance.
Announced in open Forum.
Dated: 06.03.2017. (Rajesh Jindal)
President,
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum, Bhiwani.
(Anamika Gupta) (Sudesh)
Member. Member.
