Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rohtak.
Complaint No. : 518
Instituted on : 05.09.2022
Decided on :10.07.2024
Paramjit s/o Sh. SatbirSingh R/o VPO Bohar Tehsil and District Rohtak.
……….………….Complainant.
Vs.
- Reliance General Insurance Company Limited 1st floor, Meghna Complex, Sheela Byepass Chowk, Jasbeer Colony, Sonepat Road, Rohtak 124001(Through its Manager).
- Reliance General Insurance Company Limited registered office &Corporate office at 6th Floor, Oberoi Commerz, International Business Park, Oberoi garden city, Off. western express Highway, Goregaon Mumbai 400063(Through its Manager).
...........……Respondent/opposite party.
COMPLAINT U/S 35 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT2019.
BEFORE: SH.NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT.
DR. TRIPTI PANNU, MEMBER.
DR. VIJENDER SINGH, MEMBER
Present: Sh.Wazir Singh, Advocate for the complainant.
Sh.SameerGambhir, Advocate for the opposite parties.
ORDER
NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT:
1. Brief facts of the case as per the complainant are that he is owner of vehicle bearing registration No.HR-46E-3475 and the same was insured with the respondent No.1 for a period from 14.09.2020 to 13.09.2021 vide policy No. 190622023350000358. On 13.09.2021 an FIR No.369 was lodged by the brother of the complainant namely Jayanti Ram that his vehicle no.HR-46E-1802 as well as the vehicle of the complainant were set on fire by some unknown persons. The complainant informed the opposite parties about the incident and the employees of the opposite parties asked the complainant to provide documents. Complainant gave all necessary documents to SHO however the insurance company had tried to linger on the matter by sending document request letter. Complainant provided all the documents with the opposite party and requested to pay the claim amount but the opposite parties did not pay any heed to pay the genuine claim of the complainant. The act and conduct of the opposite parties is illegal and amounts to deficiency in service. Hence this complaint and it is prayed that opposite parties may kindly be directed to pay the insured amount of Rs.310000/- alongwith interest @ 18% p.a. from the date of incident to the date of actual realisation and also to pay Rs.11000/- as litigation expenses to the complainant.
2. After registration of complaint, notices were issued to the opposite parties. Opposite parties filed their replyand in preliminary objections of the reply has submitted that complainant has not submitted the requisite documents in spite of many requests to the complainant, further the opposite party has duly sent reminder letter dated 14.02.2022, 21.02.2022, 14.03.2022 to provide the documents as under:-
i) Please provide technical report of cause of fire and analysis.
ii) Please provide sale purchase letter.
iii)Please provide cancelation letter of RC of vehicle.
But the complainant has not submitted the aforesaid requisite documents. So final closer letter dated 28.03.2022 was duly sent to complainant. Complainant failed to submit the documents so the claim of the complainant was rejected due to documents pending. On merits, it is submitted that complainant has not submitted the reason and explanation behind the fire of the vehicle. So the mystery of fire is not solved. Complainant has not taken reasonable care of the vehicle and the same is negligence and violation of terms and conditions of policy condition No.5 of the policy.The complainant has not submitted the aforesaid requisite documents so the claim of the complainant was rejected due to documents pending. The IDV of the vehicle is Rs.310000/- and the same is only considerable on submission of the requisite documents. The vehicle is with the complainant and the salvage assessment, deduction and cancellation of RC of vehicle is also required to process the claim. There is no deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties and dismissal of complaint has been sought.
3. Ld. counsel for the complainant in his evidence has tendered affidavit Ex.CW1/A, documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C14and closed his evidence on 02.05.2023. On the other hand, ld. counsel for the opposite party has tendered affidavit Ex.RW1/A, documents Ex.R1 to Ex.R6 and closed his evidence on dated 24.08.2023.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the material aspects of the case very carefully.
5. In the present case the claim of the complainant has not been paid by the respondent insurance company on the ground that the relevant documents have not been submitted by the complainant with the insurance company. As per written statement as well as affidavit the respondent insurance company has submitted that three documents have not been submitted by the complainant. So the claim filed by the complainant has been closed. To prove this fact the insurance company has placed on record three letters i.e. letter dated 14.02.2022 Ex.R1, dated 21.02.2022Ex.R2, dated 14.03.2022 Ex.R3. Through the letter dated 21.02.2022 the insurance company demanded a document i.e. technical report from the complainant. In the letter dated 14.03.2022 one another document was added in the previous demand i.e. sale purchase letter. In the letter dated 28.03.2022 one more document was added i.e. RC cancellation letter. As per our opinion it is the prime duty of the insurance company that they should depute a surveyor or investigator to assess or investigate a matter as and when they received the information regarding the loss in vehicle in question. We have minutely perused the written statement and affidavit filed by the insurance company and we have not found that the insurance company ever deputed the surveyor and loss assessor to assess the loss in the vehicle in question. The complainant has no mechanism to give a technical report to the insurance company, rather it is the duty of the insurance company to appoint a surveyor for assessment of loss. As far as the Sale Purchase Letter is concerned, it is a fact that sale purchase letter has to be deposited in the RTO office at the time of sale. One more objection has been raised by the insurance company in written statement that the reason and explanation behind the fire of the vehicle has not been explained by the complainant. On this ground we have minutely perused the FIR and detailed facts have been mentioned in this document. On the date of incident two vehicles caught fire and police was immediately informed about the incident.Regarding the other plea taken by the opposite parties that the complainant has not taken the reasonable steps to safeguard the vehicle, we have placed reliance upon the law cited by ld. Counsel for the opposite parties in (2011) IV CPJ 135(NC) titled as Mr. KeshavNatuMhatre Vs. New India Assurance Co. of Hon’ble National Commission. But the same is not fully applicable on the facts and circumstances of the case because in that the vehicle was not locked and was got theft whereas in the present case, vehicle was standing outside the house of complainant and caught fire. Hence it cannot be said that the vehicle was unattended at the time of incident. So after considering all the documents placed on record by both the parties we came into the conclusion that there is deficiency in service on the part of respondents insurance company. Hence the opposite parties are liable to pay the claim amount as per IDV(Rs.310000/-) of vehicle after deducting the salvage value which we have assessed as Rs.50000/- i.e. to pay Rs.260000/-(Rs.310000/- less Rs.50000/-) alongwith interest and compensation.
6. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case we hereby allow the complaint and direct the opposite parties to pay Rs.260000/-(Rupees two lac sixty thousand only) alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing the present complaint i.e. 05.09.2022 till its realisation and also to pay a sum of Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand only) as compensation on account of deficiency in service and Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand only) as litigation expenses to the to the complainant within one month from the date of decision. However complainant is directed to send a letter to RTO for cancellation of R.C within 15 days. Complainant is further directed not to use the vehicle in any manner and not to ply the same on road.
7. Copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced in open court:
10.07.2024.
........................................................
Nagender Singh Kadian, President
..........................................
TriptiPannu, Member.
……………………………….
Vijender Singh, Member
