Haryana

StateCommission

A/929/2015

HDFC ERGO GIC LTD. - Complainant(s)

Versus

ROHIT HARLALKA - Opp.Party(s)

SANDEEP SURI

23 Jan 2017

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA, PANCHKULA

                                                 

First Appeal No  :      929 of 2015

Date of Institution:      23.10.2015

Date of Decision :       23.01.2017

 

M/s HDFC ERGO General Insurance Company Limited, through its Branch Office, Shubham Tower, Neelam Bata Road, NIT Faridabad, through its Branch Manager.

                                      Appellant-Opposite Party

Versus

 

Rohit Harlalka s/o late Shri Raj Kumar Harlalka, Resident of House No.1020, Sector 7-C, Faridabad.

                                      Respondent-Complainant

 

CORAM:             Hon’ble Mr. Justice Nawab Singh, President.

                             Shri B.M. Bedi, Judicial Member.

                             Shri Diwan Singh Chauhan, Member   

 

Argued by:          Shri Sandeep Suri, Advocate for appellant.

                             Shri Devinder Gaur, Advocate for respondent.

 

                                                   O R D E R

 

B.M. BEDI, JUDICIAL MEMBER

 

          HDFC ERGO General Insurance Company Limited (for short ‘HDFC ERGO’)-Opposite Party is in appeal against the order dated January 20^th, 2015 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Faridabad (for short ‘the District Forum’) whereby complaint filed by Rohit Harlalka-complainant (respondent herein) seeking insurable benefits with respect to damage of his insured truck which was damaged in an accident, was accepted on the following terms:-

“6.     Opposite Party is directed to pay Rs.2,10,690/- with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing of complaint till its realization within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order and also to pay Rs.2200/- as compensation towards mental agony and harassment alongwith Rs.2200/- as litigation expenses.”    

 

2.                Truck bearing registration No.HR-38-S-0811 owned by complainant was insured with HDFC ERGO-Opposite Party from 17^th July, 2012 to 16^th July, 2013. During the subsistence of the insured period, the truck was damaged in accident. According to the complainant, he incurred the amount of Rs.2,10,690/- on the repair of his truck for which the surveyor of HDFC ERGO generated the bills. However claim being filed, HDFC ERGO did not pay the claimed amount. Hence, complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 was filed before the District Forum.

3.                The opposite party was proceeded exparte vide order dated 14^th July, 2014.

4.                On appraisal of the pleading and evidence of the complainant, the District Forum allowed complaint and directed the opposite party as detailed in paragraph No.1 of this order.

5.                Since the impugned order was passed ex-parte and the appellant-opposite party did not get opportunity to defend its case, therefore, the appellant suffered prejudice.

6.                In addition, the appellant-opposite party took the plea that at the time of accident the driver of the truck was not holding a valid and effective driving licence and therefore the complainant was not entitled for any insurable benefit.

7.                As the evidence produced by the complainant remained un-rebutted as the opposite party could not contest the complaint on merits, it would be in the interest of justice to decide the case on merits. Accordingly, appeal is accepted, the impugned order is set aside with cost of Rs.10,000/- which shall be paid by the opposite party to the complainant before the District Forum. The case is remitted to the District Forum, Faridabad. The District Forum shall decide the case afresh in accordance with law. The parties are directed to appear before the District Forum on 13.02.2017.

8.                Copy of this order be sent to the District Forum forthwith.

 

Announced 23.01.2017

(Diwan Singh Chauhan) Member

(B.M. Bedi) Judicial Member

(Nawab Singh) President

CL