O R D E R
SUBHASH GUPTA, MEMBER
The complainant has filed the present complaint against the O.P u/sec. 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The facts as alleged in the complaint are that the complainant has taken insurance policy bearing No.272101/31/2012/8067 for his Tata Indica DLE vide registration No.DL-3C-BB-2135 which was valid from 30.01.2012 to 29.01.2013. The policy contemplated road side assistance scheme also. It is alleged in the complaint that on 17.08.2012 the vehicle of the complainant broke down due to battery problem. It is further alleged that in terms of the insurance policy the complainant called O.P-2 for road assistance and as the defect could not be removed at the spot, the vehicle was toed away through Crain to workshop at Saidulajab, New Delhi. It is stated that at the time of putting down the vehicle due to negligence of the Crain driver the vehicle got damaged from front side and bumper, fog light and body guard were broken. It is further alleged in the complaint that a complaint was lodged with the O.P-2 as well as SHO, P.S. Mehrauli on 27.08.2012. It is further stated in the complaint that the Crain services were provided by O.P-1 as per terms and conditions of the insurance policy, therefore, both the O.Ps are responsible for the damage caused to the vehicle. It has also been alleged in the complaint that a surveyor appointed by the O.P-1 reported that no loss was occurred during the process of toeing away by the Crain and the claim is not covered under the scope of the policy. It is further alleged in the complaint that the insurance company has not given “No Claim Bonus” for the subsequent period and despite legal notice the O.Ps have failed to pay the damages. The complainant has prayed Rs.50,000/- towards repair of the car, bonus of 20% on the subsequent policy, Rs.1,00,000/- towards mental/ physical harassment and agony and Rs.11,000/- as litigation cost.
2. Notices to both the O.Ps were issued. O.P-1 was proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 11.07.2014 as despite services it did not participate in the proceedings. Written statement was filed on behalf of O.P-2 on 02.05.2014 where after it has chosen not to appear before the court to contest the case. In the written statement the O.P-2 has submitted that it is a false, cooked up and frivolous complaint. It has also been pleaded that the complainant has agreed in the VCRF form that O.P-2 will not be liable for any damages while toeing away the vehicle. O.P has prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
3. We have gone through the documents filed by the complainant and the pleadings of the parties. The insurance policy bearing No.272101/31/2012/8067 was valid from 30.01.2012 to 29.01.2013 and it also contained road side assistance to the policy holder. The vehicle of the complainant broke down during the subsistence of the policy. The complainant has also placed on record a report made to P.S. Mehrauli wherein he has stated that the front bumper, fog light and body guard was damaged. It was specifically stated that he has suffered a loss to the tune of Rs.10,000/- approx. The complainant has placed on record an estimate for repairs from Tata Motors dated 11.09.2012. In which apart from frontal damages it also shows rear damages of the vehicle. The complainant has filed Police complaint as well as action taken report of the Police wherein only frontal damages have been stated by the complainant. The complainant has not filed any photographs of the damaged vehicle. The complainant has also not filed any payment document made in support of his claim of the getting the vehicle repaired through any workshop or Tata Motors. No document whatsoever has been filed to show that the complainant has suffered loss of Rs.50,000/- towards repair of the vehicle.
4. In our considered view the complaint made to the Police on 27.08.2012 as the truth full version of the complainant wherein he has stated that a loss about Rs.10,000/- has been caused to him. This loss was also tentative and not based on any estimate by any expert. In view of the documents, pleadings and our observations, we find that the complainant is entitled to receive a sum of Rs.7,000/- only from the O.P-2 i.e. Kunal Break Down Services as its driver was negligent while putting down the vehicle. The complainant is also awarded a sum of Rs.2,000/- as compensation towards mental agony and harassment and Rs.1,000/- towards litigation cost. The complainant is also entitled to ‘No Claim Bonus’ as per his entitlement in the subsequent policy. Ordered accordingly.
Copy of this order be sent to the parties as per rules.
Announced this 27th day of January,2016.
(K.S. MOHI) (SUBHASH GUPTA) (SHAHINA)
President Member Member
