Haryana

StateCommission

A/594/2015

RAJ SINGH - Complainant(s)

Versus

RELIANCE GEN.INSURANCE CO. - Opp.Party(s)

MADAN SANDHU

25 Feb 2016

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, HARYANA,PANCHKULA

                                                             

First Appeal No.594 of 2015

Date of Institution: 15.07.2015      Date of Decision:25.02.2016

 

Raj Singh S/o Sh.Nafe Singh R/o village Gola Kalan, District Jhajjar (Haryana).

     …..Appellant

                                                Versus

 

1.       Reliance General Insurance Company Limited registered office, 19 Reliance Centre,Walchand Hirachand Marg, Ballard Mumbai.

2.       Divisional Manager RGI office at first floor of HDFC Bank, Delhi road, Rohtak.

         …..Respondents

 

CORAM:     Mr. R.K.Bishnoi, Judicial Member.
                   Mrs.Urvashi Agnihotri, Member.

 

Present:-     Mr.Ajay Shekhawat proxy counsel for Mr.Madan Sandhu Advocate for the appellant.

Mr.Gaurav Sharma, Advocate counsel for the  respondents.

 

                                      O R D E R

 

URVASHI AGNIHOTRI, MEMBER:

 

1. Raj Singh, Complainant – Appellant is in appeal against the Order dated 01.06.2015, passed by the learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (for short ‘District Forum’), Rohtak, whereby his complaint has been allowed against the OPs - Reliance General Insurance company Ltd. The OPs have been directed to pay the amount of Rs.13777/- (Rs.53777/- assessed by the surveyor minus Rs.40000/- as already paid by the OPs to the complainant), alongwith interest @9% p.a. from the date of filing the present complaint and Rs.2200/- as litigation expenses.
2. Briefly stated, complainant is owner of vehicle bearing No.HR-56-6099 which is insured with the OP. The said vehicle met with an accident and the OP was intimated, who appointed a surveyor and complainant was asked to get the vehicle repaired from some private mechanic. OP appointed the second surveyor, who also inspected the vehicle and submitted the report to the Company. After the second survey, the complainant got repaired the vehicle at Rohtak for which he submitted the bill for Rs.2,50,000/- as prepared by his mechanic. But, the OP passed a claim of Rs.64000/- only. Against this deficiency in service on the part of the OP, the complainant approached with the District Forum claiming Rs.250000/- alongwith interest.
3. Broadly admitting the factual position, the OPs pleaded that without any delay on their part, they had immediately appointed an independent surveyor to make the spot survey. Thereafter, the claim of the complainant was settled as per the survey report by paying the amount of Rs.40,000/- vide cheques dated 29.09.2010  and 30.09.2010. The amount of Rs.40000/- has been accepted by the complainant by his consent letter as per annexure Ex. R-3 being full and final settlement. The complainant undertook to produce the vehicle for re-inspection by the OPs, but he failed to do so. In these circumstance, the learned District Forum disposed off the complaint by directing the OPs to pay the balance amount of Rs.13777/-, as assessed by the surveyor.  
4. In Appeal before us, the complainant / appellant has again repeated his contentions as already raised before the District Forum claiming the entire amount as prayed by him.
5. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the record. It is evident that the complainant has already accepted the amount assessed by the surveyor in full and final settlement of his claim. Moreover, the complainant has failed to produce the second survey report as also any affidavit from the mechanic or surveyor in support of his assertion for claiming Rs.2,50,000/-.
6. In these circumstances, the learned District Forum has rightly directed the OPs to pay to the complainant the balance amount of Rs.13777/- as Rs.40,000/- has already been received by him. No ground whatsoever has been made before us in support of the plea for enhancing the amount of compensation. Under the circumstances, we are satisfied that ends of justice stand adequately met with the relief already granted by the learned District Forum. Consequently, the appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs.  

 

February 25th, 2016

Mrs.Urvashi Agnihotri, Member, Addl.Bench

R.K.Bishnoi, Judicial Member Addl.Bench

 

S.K.