Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Rohtak.

                                                          Complaint No. : 319.

                                                          Instituted on     : 24.05.2017.

                                                          Decided on       : 28.02.2019.

Prem Singh, age 37 years, son of Sh. Ganga Dutt, Resident of Village Goyalu Kalan, Tehsil Bahadurgarh, District Jhajjar at present resident of Gali no. 6, Shanti Nagar, Dadri Gate, Bhiwani.

                                                                    ………..Complainant.

                             Vs.

The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Opposite D. Park, Jawahar Market, Model Town, Rohtak-124001 through its Senior Divisional Manager.

……….Opposite party.

COMPLAINT U/S 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986.

BEFORE:  SH.NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT.

                   SH.VED PAL, MEMBER.

                   DR. RENU CHAUDHARY, MEMBER.

Present:       Sh. Rajesh Kumar Sharma, Advocate for the complainant.

                   Sh. R.K. Bhardwaj, Advocate for opposite party.

                                      ORDER

NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT:

1.                          Brief facts of the case are that the complainant is the registered owner of vehicle bearing registration No. HR-61-2438, which was insured with the OP vide policy No.878949 commencing from 19.01.2004 to 18.01.2005. On 23.11.2004 due to rash and negligent driving of the offending truck bearing registration No. HR-39A-2074 causing damages to the vehicle Mahindra Max No.HR-61-2438 took place within the area Bhaini Maharajpur. An FIR No.303 dated 24.11.2004 under Section 279, 337 and 304-A of IPC, Police Station Meham district Rohtak was registered. It is alleged that the intimation regarding the accident was given to the OP by the complainant. The complainant spent Rs.2,05,650/- on the repair of the vehicle. It is further alleged that the complainant has fulfilled all the formalities and submitted documents with the OP for getting the claim amount, but OP did not settle the claim. That ultimately the complainant filed a complaint No. 217 of 2011 against the OP before this learned Forum on 11.04.2011. That vide order dated 11.11.2014 passed by this learned Forum, the complaint was disposed off with the directions to the complainant to lodge the claim afresh and the OP was directed to settle the claim of the complainant within one month of lodging of the claim/document by the complainant and if the complainant is not satisfied with the decision of the OP, then the complainant is at liberty to file fresh complaint in this learned Forum. It is further alleged that in compliance to the order dated 11.11.2014, the complainant made the representation for submitting the documents with the OP. That despite submitting all the documents complainant received letter dated 24.12.2014, 26.03.2015 to submit the documents from where insurance was taken. That OP has not settled the claim till date despite the fact that documents were already received by the officials of the company. That the act of opposite party is illegal and there is deficiency in service on the part of OP. Hence, this complaint and it is prayed that opposite party may kindly be directed to pay an amount of Rs.2,05,650/-  as claim amount alongwith interest at the rate of 18% per annum from the date of accident i.e. 23.11.2004 till payment and also to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation and litigation expenses as explained in relief clause.

2                           After registration of complaint, notice was issued to the opposite parties. Opposite party in its reply has submitted that the complainant did not supplied the relevant document as required by the insurance company. He even did not contact the officials of the insurance company for the settlement of the case. A letter regarding this was sent on 24.12.2014 and some other letters were also sent by the insurance company but no reply was given by the complainant. Thus the claim should be dismissed on this ground alone. It is further submitted that on 26.03.2015 again a letter was sent to Sh. Vijay Baniwal, Advocate asking him to submit the requisite documents to the office from where the insurance was taken, but no reply was given. It is further submitted that no accident took place between truck and Mahindra Max near village Bhaini Maharajpur on 23.11.2004 as written in complaint. Wrong FIR was registered in Police Station Meham. As the complaintn has not submitted the requisite documents, hence the complainant is not entitled for any claim. It is prayed that complaint may kindly be dismissed with costs.

3                           Ld. counsel for the complainant in his evidence has tendered affidavit Ex.CW1/A, documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C11 and has closed his evidence on dated 07.05.2018. Ld. counsel for the OP has tendered affidavits Ex.RW1/A and Ex.RW1/B. Thereafter, evidence of OP was closed by court order vide order dated 03.12.2018.

4.                          We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through material aspects of the case very carefully.

5.                          In the present complaint, the complainant has placed on record his affidavit Ex.CW1/A and other documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C11. On the other hand, respondent has placed on record two affidavits  one of Sh.Phool singh Divisional Manager, OIC and other one of Sh.Ravi Aggarwal Surveyor and loss Assessor. Regarding this affidavit, a statement was made by the respondent counsel that this affidavit may please be read in the present case i.e. Prem Vs.OIC. As per the complainant, the accident took place on dated 23.11.2004 and regarding the claim a complaint was filed before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Rohtak on dated 11.04.2011 and the same was disposed of with some direction on 11.11.2014 to the complainant to lodge the claim afresh and the OP was directed to settle the claim of the complainant within one month of lodging of the claim/document by the complainant and if the complainant is not satisfied with the decision of the OP, then the complainant is at liberty to file fresh complaint in this learned Forum. After disposal of the complaint No.217 of 2011 the complainant submitted his claim application alongwith documents with the respondent office on 19.12.2014. The application and the receipts of the postal applications are Ex.C8 and Ex.C9. Thereafter, the complainant received a letter Ex.C4 from the respondent office situated on Jawahar Market, Model Town, Rohtak on dated 24.12.2014 and through this letter, the respondent officials demanded some documents. The perusal of this letter shows that insurance company without registering the claim issued a letter and through this letter they have demanded survey report and some other documents. The complainant had already deposited the relevant and required documents vide letter dated 17.12.2014 which was posted on 19.12.2014 meaning thereby the complainant had already deposited the documents with the respondent insurance company. Moreover, the complainant again received a letter dated 26.03.2015 which is Ex.C3 and through this letter the respondent officials advised Sh. Vijay Beniwal Advocate of the complainant that your client should submit the documents to the office from where insurance was taken. Now we have also perused the letter Ex.C4 which was issued by the respondent and now they have taken a contradictory view that the complainant should submit his documents with the office from where the insurance was taken.

6.                          Through this complaint the complainant demanded a sum of Rs.205650/- alongwith interest @ 18% p.a. from the date of accident till payment and compensation of Rs.50000/- for mental agony, harassment and deficiency in service. After perusal of the documents we came to the conclusion that the complainant has not placed on record any bill or record to prove that he has spent an amount of Rs.205650/- on the repair of the vehicle. Moreover, survey report or any other document has also not been placed on record to prove that he suffered a huge loss in the vehicle in question. On the other hand, the respondent admits this fact that the complainant has suffered a loss of Rs.33669/- in the vehicle in question. This amount was assessed by the surveyor and loss assessor. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, we hereby allow the complaint and direct the opposite party to pay a sum of Rs.33669/-(Rupees thirty three thousand six hundred sixty nine only)  alongwith interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing the complaint i.e. 24.05.2017 till its realization and shall also pay a sum of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees ten thousand only) as compensation on account of deficiency in service and Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand only) as litigation expenses to the complainant within one month from the date of decision.

7.                         Copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced in open court:

28.02.2019.

                                                          ................................................

                                                          Nagender Singh Kadian, President

                                                          ……………………………….

                                                          Ved Pal, Member

                                                          ………………………………

                                                          Renu Chaudhary, Member.