Delhi

North East

CC/117/2023

M/s Lee Impex - Complainant(s)

Versus

Punjab National Bank - Opp.Party(s)

18 May 2023

ORDER

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION: NORTH-EAST

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

D.C. OFFICE COMPLEX, BUNKAR VIHAR, NAND NAGRI, DELHI-93

 

Complaint Case No. 117/23

 

In the matter of:

 

1.               2.	M/s Lee Impex Through its Proprietor Mohd. Saeed Salmani S/o Sh. Lt. Fakhruddin, R/o Plot No. 190, Khasra No. 580, St No. 3, Block–D, Main Gamri Road, Bhajanpura, Delhi-110053   Begam Gulista Salmani W/o Mohd. Saeed Salmani R/o Plot No. 190, Khasra No. 580, St. No. 3, Block–D, Main Gamri Road, Bhajanpura, Delhi-110053	Complainants
	Versus
1.               2.	Punjab National Bank C-3, Yamuna Vihar, Delhi-110053   Also At:-                                                              Registered Office-Plot No.4, 205 Delhi RD, Sector 10 Dwarka, New Delhi-110075   Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd. Block No.4, 07th Floor, DLF Towers, 15, Shivagi Marg, New Delhi-110015   Also At:- Registered Office Airport Road, Yerawada, Pune-411006	Opposite Parties

 

 

CORAM:

Surinder Kumar Sharma, President

Anil Kumar Bamba, Member

Adarsh Nain, Member

ORDER

  Ms. Adarsh Nain, Member

1. The Complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.  The case of the Complainants is that the Complainant no.1, a trading firm, secured loan from Punjab National Bank, Opposite Party No.1 against the property of Complainant No.2 (ground floor only) and stocks of Complainant 1. Opposite Party No.1 valued the property and on the basis of valuation received from its authorised valuer,  granted the loan of Rs. 15 lakhs in the year 2012 against the said property. It is further stated that Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd., Opposite Party No.2, after receiving the valuation report from Opposite Party No.1 issued policy OG-18-1155-4030-00001808 to the Complainant as there was tie up between the two in that regards. Thereafter Opposite Party No.2 as per instructions from Opposite Party No.1 debited the insurance premium amount from the CC Limit account of the Complainant and they had been debiting the premium amount every year from the CC Limit of the Complainant. It is further stated that in the year 2017, Complainants constructed two more floors on the mortgaged property and approached Opposite Party No.1 to enhance the CC Limit. The Opposite Party No.1 again got the valuation done of the property and stocks from its authorised valuer and as per the new valuation report, the property was valued for 66 lakhs and stocks were valued for Rs. 90,91,620/-. Based on the new valuation report, Opposite Party No.1 enhanced the CC Limit from 15 lakhs to 48 lakhs. Opposite Party No.1 also informed Complainants that they were sending the new valuation report to Opposite Party No.2 to upgrade/enhance the insurance of the property and stocks as per the new valuation report. The Complainant allegedly suffered huge loss of approximate 5 crores as the property and complete stocks of the Complainants were burnt in the riots on 25.02.20 and requested for payment of their claim from Opposite Party No.1. At that point of time, the Complainants came to know about the cheating and negligence of Opposite Party No.1 and Opposite Party No.2. It is stated that to their utter shock Opposite Parties informed them that the insurance for the property and stocks were not enhanced as per the new valuation report. The Complainants were informed that they are entitled to get claim as per the old insurance amount. Upon inquiry, the Complainants were told that Opposite Party No.1 did not sent new valuation report of 2017 to Opposite Party No.2 and the Opposite Party No.2 continued renewing the insurance as per the old valuation report. It is stated that because of that Complainants were forced to accept the lower settlement amount as the payment was released by Opposite Party No.2. The Complainants got only Rs. 34,61,000/- in total towards property. The Complainants stated that they lodged the complaint against Opposite Party No.1 and 2 to their head offices and requested for fair investigation and their negligence but no fruitful resolution was given. It is stated that Complainants approached the IRDA and were informed to file the case in the court as this is the case of fraud and cheating which is not entertained by the IRDA. The Complainants also approached ombudsman where their claim was not considered on the ground of exceeding compensation limit and were directed to file the case in the court. It is alleged that the above said acts of the Opposite Party is clear act of negligence and misrepresentation and constitutes deficiency in services provided to the Complainants due to which the Complainants had suffered mental agony and harassment which has shattered their faith in the services of the Opposite Party No.1 and 2. Complainants have prayed for Rs. 1,22,30,620/- in total towards the deficiency of service on behalf of Opposite Parties. They further prayed for Rs. 25,00,000/- for mental harassment and Rs. 1,00,000/- as litigation expenses.
2. We have heard the counsel for the Complainants and also perused the file. The grievance of the Complainant is that the Complainants were forced to accept the lower settlement amount under the old insurance and suffered huge loss because the Opposite Party No.1 and Opposite Party No.2 failed to upgrade/enhance the insurance for the property and stocks as per the new valuation report. It is alleged that the above said acts of the Opposite Party is clear act of cheating, negligence and misrepresentation and constitutes deficiency in services provided to the Complainants due to which the Complainants had suffered mental agony and harassment.
3. It is to be noted that paragraph -35 of the complaint reads as below;

“It is further alleged that the Opposite Party No.1 and 2 without any proper clarification and justification and without any material evidence, arbitrarily, in an illegal manner misrepresented the Complainants. The Complainants had clearly been cheated/deceived by the Opposite Party No.1 and 2 just for causing wrongful gain to themselves and for causing wrongful loss to the Complainant.”

4. The perusal of the material on record also shows that the Complainants approached the IRDA and were informed to file the case in the court as this is the case of fraud and cheating which is not entertained by the IRDA. The Complainants have also lodged the complaints against Opposite Party No.1 and 2 to their head offices and requested for fair investigation in their negligence.
5. In this context, we are guided the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of The Chairman & Managing Director, City Union Bank Ltd. & Anr. vs. R. Chandramohan reported in 2023 Live Law (SC) 251. Such a complaint cannot be entertained by this Commission. The relevant portion of the said judgment is as under:
   •  
6. Therefore, in view of the above judgment, the complaint cannot be entertained and the complaint be dismissed accordingly.
7. Order announced on 18.05.23.

Copy of this order be given to the Complainants free of cost.

File be consigned to Record Room.

 

(Anil Kumar Bamba)                Member

(Adarsh Nain)       Member

(Surinder Kumar Sharma) President