BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SIRSA.
Consumer Complaint No.242/2019.
Date of instt.: 09.05.2019.
Date of Decision: 09.01.2020.
Vikas Monga (aged about 32 years) son of Sh. Ram Dass, resident of House No. 1668-A, Near B.S. School, Ward No.11, Tehsil Rania, District Sirsa.
……….Complainant.
Versus
- Raja Motors Hyundai, Dabwali Road, Sirsa, District Sirsa through its Manager/ Authorized Signatory.
- The New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Issuing Office: M.O. Ellenabad, Sirsa Road, Ellenabad District Sirsa through its Branch Manager/ Authorized person.
- The New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Head Office: New India Assurance Building, 87, MG Road Fort, Mumbai- 400 001 through its General Manager/ Authorized person.
..……..Opposite Parties.
COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 1986.
Before: SH.R.L.AHUJA…………………………PRESIDENT
MRS.SUKHDEEP KAUR………MEMBER.
Present: Shri Ganesh Sethi, Advocate for the complainant.
Shri JBL Garg & Sh.Vishnu Bhagwan, Advocates for opposite party No.1.
Shri A.S. Kalra, Advocate for opposite parties no.2 and 3.
ORDER
In brief, the case of the complainant is that complainant is registered owner of Car make Hyundai I-20 sportz CRDI Polar white in colour model 2017 bearing registration No. HR-44J-2096. That complainant got insured his aforesaid car from op no.2 vide policy No.35370431180300000586 dated 15.10.2018 for the period 15.10.2018 to 14.10.2019 and paid Rs.16,952/- as premium of insurance and it was assured that in the event of any partial loss, no depreciation shall be deducted. On 2.11.2018, the above said car met with an accident and was badly damaged. It is further averred that immediately said car was shifted to the workshop of op no.1 for its repair and matter was reported to op no.2. The Surveyor of op no.2 inspected the car and he also assured the complainant that his case is genuine one and all the expenses incurred upon the vehicle will be paid to complainant by op no.2. Thereafter, estimate was made and vehicle was repaired. It is further averred that after repair of vehicle, complainant informed op no.2 and op no.2 sent their surveyor again at the workshop who again inspected the vehicle and took photographs and showed his satisfaction on the repair work and parts replaced by op no.1. A bill of total amount of Rs.77,016/- was issued to complainant on account of repair and an amount of Rs.77,000/- in lump sum was paid by complainant to op no.1 vide receipt No.26277 dated 30.11.2018. Thereafter, complainant submitted the said bill/ invoice to op no.2 for payment of said amount as per terms and conditions of policy. It is further averred that final survey was done by the Surveyor and all the concerned record of vehicle was also collected by him. That complainant approached the ops no.2 and 3 time and again and requested them to pay the said amount of Rs.77,000/- but they put off the matter with one pretext or the other and finally op no.2 without any reasonable or valid cause refused to pay the said amount to the complainant. The ops have caused deficiency in service and unfair trade practice and also harassment to the complainant. That complainant also got served a legal notice dated 8.3.2019 upon the ops but to no effect. Hence, this complaint.
2. On notice, opposite parties appeared. Op no.1 filed written statement taking certain preliminary objections. It is submitted that op no.1 only repaired the accidental vehicle of the complainant as per his instructions and no deficiency in service has been attributed to answering op and no relief has been claimed against answering op.
3. Opposite party no.2 filed written statement taking certain preliminary objections that complaint is not maintainable before this Forum and complaint is without any cause of action and is not maintainable as there is no deficiency in service on the part of company or its officials. It is further submitted that complaint is pre-mature and complainant is estopped by his own act and conduct to file the present complaint, as Competent Authority Divisional Manager, Sirsa did not pass any order of repudiation on the claim lodged by complainant and the said decision could not be taken by the competent authority for want of confirmation in writing by way of affidavit etc. from complainant that he had not taken any claim on the previous policy, as before deciding any claim it is mandatory to seek compliance of Section 64VB of Insurance Act, which has clause of confirmation of NCB and claim, if any taken by insured from the previous insurance company. Though mail has been sent by the company to the Nodal Officer, but no reply or response has been received from the company, where from vehicle No. HR 44J-2096 belonging to complainant was insured. Complainant also failed to supply the information about the confirmation of claim, if any lodged or taken on the previous policy and mail, telephonic conversation in this context has been processed by answering op company and result is still awaited and in absence of same claim cannot be proceeded further. It is further submitted that complainant has concealed true and material facts from this Forum in this context, as after receipt of notice from counsel of complainant, detailed reply was sent to complainant and his counsel, wherein it was specifically mentioned that claim cannot be proceeded further for want of confirmation of 64VB compliance, as while getting the insurance coverage for the period 15.10.2018 to 14.10.2019 for the vehicle from company, complainant or his representative has submitted declaration about no claim to be availed by them from the previous insurer and being upon their assertion, 20% No Claim Bonus has been availed by complainant and if this assertion is found wrong, incorrect, fraudulent and false one, in that eventuality, decision is to be taken by the competent authority in accordance with the terms and conditions of the policy, hence confirmation was/is necessary and essential. So, no decision on the claim lodged by complainant could be taken and it reflects that complainant has committed breach of trust and violated the principle of utmost good faith as contract of insurance is based upon principle of utmost good faith. It is further submitted that Surveyor has assessed the amount of Rs.73,150/- without deduction of salvage from this amount, but this amount or whatsoever amount is to be paid or is not to be paid, is to be decided by the Competent authority only after receipt of information referred above. Claim cannot be paid on the basis of estimate and bills. It is further submitted that two aspects are suspicious and doubtful, as invoice bills are of 30.11.2018 and date and time of printing of estimate is 1.12.2018. Survey has been allotted on 2.11.2018 and same was conducted on 2.11.2018, meaning thereby on the date of survey, estimate was not there. Further in the photographs dated 2.11.2018 taken by surveyor, reading has been shown as 19725. While denying all other contents of the complaint, it is submitted that it is wrong that immediate intimation was given to company, rather according to claim intimation letter, intimation was given to company on 2.11.2018, whereas accident allegedly took place on 31.10.2018. Lastly it is submitted that had there been any claim on the previous policy, in that eventuality 20% NCB would not have been given by answering op when complainant had got issued policy from answering op and in case it is reported by previous insurer that complainant had claim on previous policy, in that eventuality, decision is to be taken by the competent authority accordingly. With these averments, dismissal of complaint prayed for.
4. Learned counsel for ops no.2 and 3 suffered a statement that written statement filed on behalf of op no.2 be also read on behalf of op no.3.
5. The parties then led their respective evidence.
6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record carefully.
7. The complainant in order to prove his complaint has furnished his affidavit Ex.CW1/A in which he has deposed and reiterated all the averments made in the complaint. He has also furnished copies of documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C11. On the other hand, ops no.2 and 3 have produced affidavit of Sh. K.S. Chaudhary, Divisional Manager as Ex.R1, affidavit of Sh. Jasvir Singh Dhariwal, Surveyor as Ex.R2 and copies of documents Ex.R3 to Ex.R13. Op no.1 produced affidavit of Sh. Rahul Verma, Accountant as Ex.R14.
8. It is undisputed fact between the parties that complainant is owner of vehicle bearing registration No. HR-44J-2096 which was insured with ops no.2 and 3 for the period 15.10.2018 to 14.10.2019 on payment of premium of Rs.16,952/-. The vehicle of complainant met with an accident on 2.11.2018 and it was shifted to the workshop of op no.1 after accident in a damaged condition. Due intimation was lodged with ops no.2 and 3 and thereafter survey was got conducted and claim was lodged with the ops no.2 and 3. The Survyeor after evaluating all the losses of complainant submitted his detailed report by which he assessed net loss to the tune of Rs.73,150/- after deducting Rs.1000/- as policy clause. But however, claim was not settled and paid by ops on the ground that complainant has not made any declaration qua his taking of No Claim Bonus while getting policy from ops.
9. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for ops no.2 and 3 has stated at bar that ops no.2 and 3 are ready to settle and pay claim in case complainant files a declaration or in the alternate they are ready to pay the amount of claim after deduction of No Claim Bonus i.e. 20% of premium which he had availed at the time of taking the policy.
10. On the other hand, learned counsel for complainant has stated at bar that he has no objection in case claim is settled and paid by ops after deducting amount of No claim bonus which comes to Rs.3390.40.
11. In view of above discussion, present complaint stands allowed and opposite parties are directed to settle and pay the claim of complainant on the basis of Surveyor’s report after deducting amount of Rs.3390.40 within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order, failing which the ops will be liable to pay interest @7% per annum on the payable amount from the date of order till actual payment. We further direct the ops to pay a sum of Rs.5000/- as composite compensation and litigation expenses to the complainant. A copy of this order be supplied to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room.
Announced in open Forum. Member President,
Dated:09.01.2020. District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum, Sirsa.
