View 17105 Cases Against Reliance
DHARMENDER filed a consumer case on 06 Nov 2015 against RELIANCE GEN.INSURANCE CO. in the StateCommission Consumer Court. The case no is A/308/2015 and the judgment uploaded on 03 Dec 2015.
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA, PANCHKULA
First Appeal No.308 of 2015
Date of Institution: 31.03.2015
Date of Decision: 06.11.2015
Dharmender S/o Shri Maan Singh R/o H.No.420, W.No.6, Delhi road, Byepass,Charkhi Dadri, Distt. Bhiwani.
…..Appellant
Versus
Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd., Branch office at Rohtak, through its Branch Manager.
…..Respondent
CORAM: Mr. R.K.Bishnoi, Judicial Member.
Mrs.Urvashi Agnihotri, Member.
Present: Shri Ajay Dagar, Advocate counsel for appellants.
Shri Gaurav Sharma, Advocate counsel for the respondent.
O R D E R
R.K.BISHNOI, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
It was alleged by the complainant that he got his truck bearing registration No. HR-61A-1761 insured from the respondent-opposite party (O.P.) for the value of Rs.10,00,000/-. On 08.07.2011 the truck met with an accident and DDR No.18 dated 10.07.2011 was registered. He immediately informed the opposite party about the incident. The claim of Rs.4,55,000/- was submitted with the O.P. He visited office of O.P. several times to give the claim, but, to no avail. Thus there was deficiency in service on the part of the O.P.
2. O.P. filed reply controverting his claim and alleged that complainant did not spend Rs.4,55,000/- on repair of vehicle. He did not fulfill the essential requirements to settle the claim inspite of repeated reminders. Thus there was no deficiency in service on it’s part. Objections about maintainability of the complaint, jurisdiction and suppressed the material and relevant facts etc. were also raised and requested to dismiss the complaint.
3. After hearing both the parties, learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal, Forum, Jhajjar Nagar (in short “District Forum”) allowed the complaint vide impugned order dated 30.01.2015 and directed as under:-
“Therefore, we direct the complainant to complete the formalities of the respondent as required within a period of 30 days from the date of order under a valid receipt issued by the respondent. Thereafter, the respondent is also directed to make the payment of Rs.3,07,375/- to the complainant being full and final settlement of his claim as per consent given by him vide consent letter Ex.R-7 immediately after completion of necessary formalities as required by the respondent without any further delay. The complaint is disposed of accordingly.”
4. Feeling aggrieved therefrom, complainant-appellant has preferred this appeal.
5. Arguments heard. File perused.
6. Learned counsel for the appellant vehemently argued that no interest was paid to him by the District forum. O.P. kept sleeping over his claim. He spent Rs.4,55,000/- on the repair, whereas District forum has allowed Rs.3,07,375/- so the amount of compensation be enhanced and interest be also paid.
7. This argument is of no avail. From the perusal of consent letter Ex.R-7 it is clear that complainant agreed for Rs.3,07,375/- as full and final settlement. When he has agreed to accept this amount without any objection he cannot file complaint as opined by Hon’ble National Commission expressed in RAJ KUMAR versus UNITED India INSURANCE CO. LTD., III (2011) CPJ 354 (NC). As he agreed for specific amount and complaint was not maintainable, so there is no question of any interest. Resultantly, appeal fails and the same is hereby dismissed.
November 06th, 2015 Urvashi Agnihotri R.K.Bishnoi, Member Judicial Member Addl. Bench Addl. Bench
S.K.
Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes
Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.