Haryana

Hisar

20/2014

Rameshwer - Complainant(s)

Versus

OIC Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

M L Aggarwal

05 May 2015

ORDER

Heading1
Heading2
 
Complaint Case No. 20/2014
 
1. Rameshwer
S/o Sh Mani Ram, R/o Bhungla, Loharu, Bhiwani
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. OIC Ltd
SCO 73-74, UE-II, Hisar
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 JUDGES Vinod Jain PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MRS. Rajni Goyat MEMBER
 
For the Complainant:M L Aggarwal, Advocate
For the Opp. Party: Ravindra Agarwall, Advocate
ORDER

Undisputedly, motor cycle bearing registration No.HR-18A/4508 of complainant-Rameshwar, was duly insured with Oriental Insurance Company i.e. with the opposite party for the period upto 7.10.2008. During the period of insurance, on 21.6.2008, complainant met with an accident. On getting information of the accident, opposite party  sent surveyor Sh.Suresh Goyal ,who later on gave his report, assessing  loss to the tune of Rs.5103/-.  Opposite party also wrote letter to the complainant dated 28.2.2009 requesting to send discharge voucher for sending that amount to him. According to the complainant in this complaint, he duly sent discharge voucher, but did not receive the payment of Rs.5103/-.  That he  was informed that said amount was sent to him vide cheque No.12398150,  in account No.0337CD237 of the complainant in J&K Bank Hisar.  But  he was surprised to come to know that as per the bank that said cheque was still unused in the account of the opposite party. It is also pleaded that the complainant is serving in Chandigarh and so has to come to Hisar, number of times, for follow up, to get this meager amount of Rs.5103/-. He has thus been harassed a lot. He sent legal notice dated 19.10.2013,  in reply to which, the opposite party demanded salvage and discharge voucher.  Averring it,  as deficiency of service, on the part of the opposite party,  complainant has filed this complaint on  9.1.2014, for said assessed amount of Rs.5103/-, with up to date interest, besides damages for his own harassment, humiliation etc. and litigation expenses.

2.       Simple case of the opposite party, in its reply is that despite their repeated letters, complainant did not deposit the salvage nor sent discharge voucher, so there is no deficiency of service on their part.

3.       Both the parties have placed on record, copies of various documents, proving  aforesaid undisputed facts.  We do not find any merit in the case of the opposite party that the complainant did not deposit the salvage or did not send discharge voucher, to justify their act in not sending duly assessed amount to the complainant.   Ex.C-5 is copy of letter dated 1.8.2008 of the opposite party, written to the complainant, bearing endorsement regarding receiving salvage from him on dated 6.11.2008. Therefore said stand of the opposite party, in this regard has been falsified by this document which is not disputed.  Further Ex.C-4 is copy of letter of J&K Bank dated 20.3.2013, written to the opposite party, in reference to its letter dated 20.3.2013, specifically mentioning that cheque No.12398150 dated 17.11.2008, for the account of  Rameshwar son of Mani Ram i.e. the complainant, for Rs.5103/- was still unused in their account.  If said cheque was not sent( after all the formalities), then there was no reason for the opposite party to write said letter to the bank seeking the status of that cheque and then there was no occasion for the bank to reply that said cheque was never  received in the bank and it was still unused in their account.  Said cheque of Rs.5103/- must have been prepared and sent by the opposite party to the complainant only after completion all the formalities, including to receive the discharge voucher. Therefore, it is very clear that the opposite party, had necessarily been harassing the complainant, in not making the payment of assessed amount of Rs.5103/- .

4.       Record also shows that matter is also pending adjudication in the Court of  Illaqa Magistrate, Hisar, against the Manager of the opposite party for offences punishable under Sections 420/467/468/471/323/506/34  of IPC.

5.       From all aforesaid reasons it is very clear that there was not only  gross deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party, but  also unfair trade practice on its part.

6.       Resultantly, this complaint is hereby allowed, with a direction to the opposite party,  to pay  Rs.5103/-, to the complainant with interest @ 9% per annum from the  date of  the accident i.e. 21.6.2008, till payment. Complainant is also hereby awarded compensation of Rs.5,000/- for his harassment, mental agony etc. and litigation expenses of Rs.1100/- against the opposite party.

Announced.                                                         

Dated:07.05.2015.                                          

 

 
 
[JUDGES Vinod Jain]
PRESIDENT
 
[HON'BLE MRS. Rajni Goyat]
MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.