DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

WEST TRIPURA :  AGARTALA

 

CASE   NO:   CC- 15 of 2018

 

Sri Gopal Debbarma,

S/O. Late Indrajit Debbarma,

House No.811/327/A. Debbarma,

No.-14, Near Cosmopolitan Club,

P.S.-West Police Station, Agartala,

Dist.-West Tripura    .…..............…..........................Complainant.

 

 VERSUS

 

1. The Oriental Insurance Company Limited,

Represented by Edelweiss Insurance Brokers Ltd.,

Unit No.102, 10th Floor, Sakhar Bhavan, 

230 Nariman Point,

Mumbai-400002 

 

2. The Mobille Estore,

Store Code 1075,

6, C.R. Avenue, E-Mall,

Chandni Chowk,

Kolkata-700072.

 

3. The Oriental Insurance Company Limited,

H.G. B. Road, Agartala,

Near Sarkar Nursing home, Agartala,

District-West Tripura, Pin-799001 …................... Opposite parties.

 

 

      __________PRESENT__________

 

 SRI BAMDEB MAJUMDER

PRESIDENT,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER  

DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,

      WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA. 

 

SMT. Dr. G. DEBNATH

MEMBER,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER 

DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, 

  WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA.

 

SRI U. DAS

MEMBER,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER 

DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, 

  WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA.

 

C O U N S E L

 

For the Complainant : Sri  Kajal Nandi,

  Advocate. 

For the O.P. No.-1&2 : None appears. 

For the O.P. No.-3 : Sri P. Gautam,

  Sri Sumit Debnath,

  Advocates.                                                                                                                          

JUDGMENT  DELIVERED  ON: 24/01/2019

J U D G M E N T

 

The complainant Sri Gopal Debbarma set the law in motion by presenting the petition U/S 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 complaining deficiency of service committed by the O.Ps. 

  The complainant's case, in brief, is that he had purchased one mobile phone(Samsung Galaxy S8+ Black) on 05/05/2017 from the Mobile Estore, 6, C.R Anenue E-Mall, Chandnichowk, Kolkata, the O.P. No.2 on payment of Rs.64,000/-. At the time of purchase of the mobile phone he had got the mobile phone insured with the Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. vide Certificate No. AZTMA3150325 through the Edelweiss, Insurance Brokers Limited, 23, Nairman point Mumbai, the O.P. No.1 on payment of Rs.933/- being the premium. The insurance policy was valid from 05/05/2017 to 04/05/2018. It is pleaded by the complainant that on 14/02/2018 evening when he was on the Rajguru Road Near Metro Plaza Hotel, New Delhi, he met with in a accident when a Bi-cycle being ridden by a child dashed him from behind. As a result he fell on the ground and his mobile phone slipped from his hand and fell into the manhole which was then open. The drain was full of black colour waste water. He could not recover the mobile phone. He immediately reported the matter to the near by Police Station where G.D. Entry was made by the Station Officer vide No.561162/2018 dated 14/02/2018. The Complainant further stated in his complaint that on 07/03/2018 he returned to Agartala from Delhi and on the next day i.e. on 08/03/2018 he sent an E-mail to  support@amtrustmobilesolutions.in  claiming the sum insured in respect of his mobile phone which he had lost in the New Delhi. But his claim was not entertained. Hence, he has filed the instant complaint  for redress. 

The O.P. No.1 Edelweiss Insurance Brokers Limited after receiving notice from the Forum has submitted written objection through Courier Service(Blue Dart). The written objection was signed by their authorized officer and it was received by this Forum on 25/07/2018. From the written objection it transpires that the O.P. has denied to have committed deficiency of service. It is pleaded by the O.P. that the complainant had availed of insurance package of his mobile phone through him from the Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. who alone is entitled to decide whether to allow or decline the Insurance claim that had been raised by the Complainant. The O.P. has thus prayed for dismissal of the complaint against him.  

The O.P. No. 2 has not taken any step though notice was sent to the said O.P. by post from the Forum. So the case proceeded exparte the said O.P.  

As per order dated 14/06/2018 the Oriental Insurance Company Ltd, Agartala has been added as O.P. No.3 in this case. Notice was duly issued to the O.P. No.3 from the Forum. The said O.P. after appearing before the Forum submitted written statement on 20/08/2018. In the written statement the O.P. No.3 has denied to shoulder any liability in respect of the missing of the mobile phone of the Complainant. It is pleaded by the O.P. that the Complainant did not mention in his complaint the policy particulars, Certificate Number of the alleged policy purportedly issued by the Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. It is also stated by the O.P. that in the Insurance Certificate bearing No. AZTMA3150325 issued by the O.P. No.2 the name of Oriental Insurance Company Ltd.  has been mentioned but at the same time the name of National Insurance Company Ltd. has also been reflected on the body of the Certificate which creates confusion as to whom the liability will be fixed. The said O.P. further pleaded that the Complainant is not entitled to get Insurance benefit as per the terms and conditions contained in the Certificate as his claim is barred under the exclusion clause  provided in para -8 sub-para-1 which provides that the Insurer shall not be liable for “Loss or damage to the Equipment due to mysterious, circumstances / disappearance or unexplained reasons”. The O.P. has denied any deficiency of service committed by it towards the complainant. 

The O.P. has thus urged for dismissal of the complaint. 

2. EVIDENCE ADDUCED BY THE PARTIES:

In support of the Complaint, the Complainant has Examined himself as PW-1 and produced 04 documents viz Insurance Certificate, Police Report, SMS Report, Claim information and Voucher. The documents are marked  Exhibit-I series. 

On behalf of the O.P. No.3 one witness namely Sri Goutam Banik, Asstt. Manager, Oriental Insurance Company Limited has been Examined. The said witness did not adduce any documentary evidence. 

 

 POINTS TO BE DETERMINED:- 

3.  Based on the contentions raised by both the parties the following issues are made for determination:  

   (I). Whether  the mobile phone(Samsung Galaxy S8+ Black)  of the Complainant  was  insured with the Oriental Insurance Company Limited (O.P. No.3)? 

    (ii).  Whether  there was  any deficiency of service committed by the O.Ps. towards the Complainant? 

(iii). Whether the Complainant is entitled to get any  compensation/relief ?

4. DECISION AND REASONS FOR DECISION:

  Now we are to decide the issues on consideration of the materials on record. 

  From the cash memo dated 05/05/2017 issued by the O.P. No.2 (under Exhibit-I series) it is proved and established that the Complainant had purchased his mobile phone (Samsung Galaxy S8+ Black) on payment of Rs.64,605/- from the O.P. No.2 on 05/05/2017 and that on the same day Insurance Certificate was issued by the O.P. No.1 in respect of the said mobile phone on consideration of Rs.933/- being the premium having Certificate ref. No. AZTMA3150325 in the name of the Oriental Insurance Company Limited. The policy was valid from 05/05/2017 to 04/05/2018. The payment of Rs.933/- as premium for the Insurance Policy also got corroborated  from the cash memo dated 05/05/2017 issued by the O.P. No.2. Even the Insurance Certificate ref. No.AZTMA3150325 which has been reflected on the top of the Insurance Certificate has also been corroborated  from the cash memo dated 05/05/2017 issued by the O.P. No.2 wherein the same reference No. has been quoted. We find that the O.P. No.1 has asserted in his W.S. that the complainant had availed of insurance package through him from the Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. who alone is entitled to decide whether to allow or deny the insurance claim that had been raised by the Complainant.

      The contention of the O.P. No.3 that it has no liability towards the complainant taking the plea that the Complainant did not furnish policy particulars in respect of the mobile phone does not appear to us convincing in consideration of the money receipt and the Insurance Certificate(Exhibit-I series) which have been furnished by the Complainant and also having regard to the specific assertion made by the O.P. No.1 in his W.S. at para -2 wherein the said O.P. has specifically stated that the complainant had availed of the Insurance package from the Oriental Insurance Company Limited who alone is entitled to decide whether to allow or decline  the Insurance claim. 

  In view of the above discussion we are convinced that the mobile phone of the Complainant was insured with the Oriental Insurance Company Limited i.e. the O.P. No.3. 

  It appears to us that the Complainant in his complaint and his Examination-in-Chief by way of Affidavit has asserted that he has lost his mobile phone on 14/02/2018 at Rajguru Road, Near Metro Plaza Hotel, New Delhi. On that day in the evening when he was on the Rajguru Road Near Metro Plaza Hotel he met with an accident when a Bi-cycle being ridden by a child dashed him from behind and that as a result he fell on the ground and his mobile phone slipped from his hand and thereafter fell into the manhole which was then open. The manhole was full of black colour waste water. He thus could not recover his mobile phone from there. He immediately reported the incident to the near by Police Station where G.D. Entry was made by the Station Officer vide No.561162/2018 dated 14/02/2018. The complainant has produced copy of the G.D. Entry under Exhibit-I series. 

    We find that the complainant has satisfactorily  explained as to how he had lost his mobile phone and that the explanation was supported by the G.D. Entry made with the Crime Branch, Delhi Police. Hence we are satisfied that the insurance claim raised by the Complainant in respect of his mobile phone can not be rejected under para-8 sub-para-1 of the exclusion clause described in the insurance policy. Moreover, the incident of missing of the mobile phone happened during the valid period of the insurance policy. The O.P. No.3 Oriental Insurance Company Limited is thus under contractual obligation to indemnify the Complainant by paying the insured amount of Rs.64,900/- as per the insurance policy under Certificate ref. No.AZTMA3150325. 

 

5. Resulting, the Complainant U/S 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 filed by the Complainant is allowed on contest. It is hereby directed that the O.P. No.3 the Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Agartala Branch will pay Rs.64,900/- being the insured amount of the mobile phone of the Complainant along with compensation of Rs.10,000/- on account of mental agony and harassment suffered by him together with Rs.3,000/- as cost of litigation. The O.P. No.3 is to pay the aforesaid amount of Rs.77,900/-(Rs.64,900/- + Rs.10,000/- + Rs.3,000/-) in total with a period of 2 months from the date of judgment failing which the amount shall carry interest @ 9% P.A. till the payment is made. 

 

ANNOUNCED

 

 SRI BAMDEB MAJUMDER

PRESIDENT,

DISTRICT CONSUMER  DISPUTES 

REDRESSAL FORUM,

WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA

 

 

 

 

 SMT. DR. G. DEBNATH,

 MEMBER, 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, 

WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA

 

SRI U. DAS

MEMBER,

DISTRICT CONSUMER 

DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, 

 WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA.