12.04.2024

Sh. Sanjay Kumar, President

1. In brief facts of the present case are that the complainant is the owner of vehicle bearing no. DL 8CAC1226 and for the year 2014 got insured with OP-1 for WDV of Rs. 11,50,000/-. It is stated that complainant paid the due premium for the year 2014 and for 2015 with WDV of Rs. 10,50,000/- vide policy no. 271500/31/2015/5581/001 through OP-2 Rajbi Khokhar (Agent). It is further stated that at the time of taking of the policy complainant was assured by the representative of OP-1 that company would provide best of its services.
2. It is stated that on the intervening night of 06.07.2015 and 07.07.2015 the above said vehicle was stolen and information was given to the office concerned of the OP-1. An FIR was registered bearing no. 6560 dated 07.07.2015 and claim for the same duly submitted along with untraced report. It is stated that OP-1 pressurized the complainant to accept the claim lesser than WDV . It is stated that on the assurances of OP-1 and complainant does not want to go into litigation the matter was settled for a claim of Rs. 9,60,000/- but OP-1 did not reimburse despite several visits and turned down without any proper justification, explanation and reasoning. The complainant sent a legal notice dated 16.08.2016 through speed post but no reply given by OP-1. It is stated that OPs have committed an offence of the deficiency and negligence of services therefore, present complaint file.
3. It is  stated that responded be directed to pay Rs. 10,50,000/- towards the WDV of the stolen vehicle, to pay Rs. 5 Lakh for the mental agony and harassment and also award Rs. 25,000/- a litigation expenses. 
4. OP-1 filed written statement and taken preliminary objection that present complaint is not maintainable and barred by the law as a suit filed by complainant bearing no. 717/2016 titled as “ Vipin Sahrawat Vs. Oriental Ins. Co. Ltd.” is pending before Sh. Prashant Kumar Ld. ADJ/04 (North West District) rohini Courts, Delhi and same is sub-judice. It is further stated that there is no deficiency of service on the part of OP-1, therefore present complaint is liable to be dismissed.
5. The OP-1 stated preliminary submission that the insurance policy issued to complainant is “Motor Ins. Certificate cum policy schedule private car package policy effective from 02.01.2015 and valid up to 01.01.2016 for vehicle bearing no. DL8CAC1226 (Mahindra Scorpio). It is stated that the claim of complainant was never repudiated  but a claim of Rs. 958000/- approved by the competent authority and letter was also sent to the complainant. The principal approval for the claim was Rs  960000/- and Rs. 2000/- deducted because of compulsory excess applicable as per terms and condition of the policy. It is further stated that complainant was required to submit letter of subrogation, indemnity bond, undertaking on Rs. 100/- non-judicial stamp paper each with notarize, NOC from financer, sign Form No.29 & 30 and transfer the name in the RC in favor of OP-1.
6. It is stated that complainant incorrectly/wrongly mentioned the IDV value of Rs. 10,50,000/- in proposal form and in good faith OP-1 accepted without going into technicalities. As per regulation the depreciation application in the 2^nd year of the policy is 15% and after applying depreciation the correct IDV is 9,60,000/-. It is stated that there is no cause of action in favor of the complainant therefore, present complaint is liable to be dismissed.
7.  On merit all the allegations are denied and contents of preliminary objections and submissions are reiterated. It is stated that the legal notice replied through panel lawyer Sh. Mithilesh Sinha but returned with remarks “chamber khali hai”. It is stated that complaint is liable to be dismissed.
8. As per record OP-2 served but failed to appear and proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 25.04.2018.
9. Complainant filed rejoinder to the WS of OP-1 and denied all the allegations made therein and reiterated contents of the complaint. The complainant has not specifically stated regarding the filing of civil suit no. 717/2016.
10. OP-1 filed evidence by way of affidavit of Sh. Deepak Mittal Sr. Divisional Manager. In the affidavit contents of WS reiterated. OP-1 relied on copy of Ins. Policy ex.R1.
11. Written arguments filed by complainant as well as OP.
12. We have heard Sh. Sujit Kesari counsel for OP-1. Neither complainant appeared nor counsel despite given ample opportunities to address oral arguments. We have gone through the written arguments filed by complainant. During the course of arguments counsel for OP-1 filed photocopy of judgment of Ld. ADJ 04 Sh. Sunil Chaudhary (North West) Rohini dated 31.10.2023.
13. At the outset it is stated that complainant concealded the fact that simultaneously he has filed a suit of recovery against OP-1 before civil court. The complainant also concealded the fact that civil suit no. 717/2016 titled as “Vipin Sahrawat Vs. Oriental Ins. Co. Ltd.” already decreed in his favor vide judgment dated 31.10.2023. The relevant para of the judgment is reproduced here as under:-

“for the reasons discussed above, suit of the plaintiff Vipin Sahrawat is decreed in his favor and against the defendant Oriental Ins. Co. for an amount of Rs. 10,48,000/- along with interest 6% p.a from the date of suit till realization. The cost of the suit is also awarded to the plaintiff. Decree sheet be prepared”.

14. In view of above discussion present complaint is barred by principle of Res Judicata. The present complaint is not maintainable, therefore, dismissed.
15. The present complaint is sheer misuse of process of law by the complainant. The complainant concealded the material facts from this Commission/Forum that he had filed a Civil Suit seeking same relief and same has been decreed on 31.10.2023. In our considered opinion this is a fit case where the complainant shall be burdened with cost, therefore, we imposed cost of Rs. 1 Lakh to be deposited with Delhi State Commission Consumer Welfare Legal Aid Fund  within 30 days from the date of order. File be consigned to record room.
16. Copy of the order be given to the parties free of cost as per order dated 04.04.2022 of Hon’ble State Commission after receiving an application from the parties in the registry. The orders be uploaded on www.confonet.nic.in.

Announced in open Commission on  12.04.2024.

SANJAY KUMAR                 NIPUR CHANDNA                       RAJESH

       PRESIDENT                             MEMBER                                MEMBER