DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM (EAST)

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

CONVENIENT SHOPPING CENTRE, FIRST FLOOR,

SAINI ENCLAVE, DELHI – 110 092

C.C. NO. 727/13

Shri Jasvinder Kumar

S/o Shri Hari Ram

R/o H. No. 180-182, Janta Quarters

Vivek Vihar, Delhi – 110 095                                                ….Complainants

Vs.

1. Oriental Ins. Co. Ltd.

C-1/2, Express Market

2^nd Floor, Niti Khand – III

Indirapuram, Ghaziabad

Uttar Pradesh – 201 005

2. Oriental Ins. Co. Ltd.

Head office at

A-25/27, Asaf Ali Road

New Delhi                                                                                         ….Opponents

Date of Institution: 23.08.2013

Judgment Reserved for : 07.09.2016

Judgment Passed on : 09.09.2016

CORUM:

Sh. Sukhdev Singh (President)

Dr. P.N. Tiwari  (Member)

Ms. Harpreet Kaur Charya (Member)

Order By : Shri Sukhdev Singh (President)

JUDGEMENT

The complainant Shri Jasvinder Kumar has filed a complaint under Section 12(a) of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 (hereinafter to be referred as Act), against Oriental Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. to award Rs. 3,71,045/- with 18% interest, compensation of Rs. 50,000/- on account of harassment, mental agony and pain and Rs. 21,000/- as litigation charges.

2.        The facts in brief are that the complainant got his vehicle no.     HR-55J – 0814 insured under policy no. 252106/31/2012/1736 for a period from 29.01.2012 to midnight of 28.01.2013.  It is stated that in the month of October 2012, his vehicle met with an accident at Shahdara and sustained the damages.  He towed his vehicle by crane and paid a sum of Rs. 6,000/- towards paid services and obtained receipt no. 103 dated 05.10.2012.  He has further stated that he submitted the documents to the office of OP.  The complainant spent an amount of Rs. 19,000/- on  parts of crane, which were purchased from M/s. G.S. Engineering Company; Rs. 3,42,795/- spent on parts of damaged vehicle making a total of Rs. 3,71,045/-, which was claimed by him.  Thus, he has prayed for an amount of Rs. 3,71,045/- with 18% interest.

3.        OPs were served and they appeared, but did not file the WS inspite of opportunities.  Hence, they were proceeded ex-parte.

4.        In support of its case, the complainant has examined himself on affidavit.  He has deposed the facts, which have been stated in the complaint.    

5.        We have perused the material placed on record such as evidence of the complainant and the documents.  From the evidence and the documents, it is noticed that the complainant has alleged the date of accident as October 2012, but he has not placed anything on record to show the date of accident.  Further, he has not placed on record as to whether his claim has been repudiated by the insurance company or not.  No surveyor report has been placed on record.  Not only this, there is nothing on record to show whether he has filed his claim with the insurance company or not. 

            In the absence of any evidence on record, we are of the opinion that the complainant has failed to prove his complaint and any deficiency on the part of OPs.  That being so, his complaint deserves dismissal and the same is dismissed.

Copy of the order be supplied to the parties as per rules.

File be consigned to Record Room.

(DR. P.N. TIWARI)                                              (HARPREET KAUR CHARYA)

Member                                                                                Member    

      (SUKHDEV SINGH)

             President