Punjab

Sangrur

CC/65/2021

Satish Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

Sahara Credit Cooperative Society - Opp.Party(s)

Sh. G.S.Shergill

09 Aug 2024

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SANGRUR .

                                                                        Complaint No. 65

 Instituted on:   18.01.2021

                                                                        Decided on:     09.08.2024

 

Sunil Kumar aged about 62 years son of Sh. Piara Lal, resident of H.No.29, Ward No.1, Lehra, Tehsil Moonak, Distt. Sangrur.

                                                         …. Complainant 

                                                 Versus

Bharti AXA General Insurance Co. Ltd. Hosto Centre No.43, Millers Road, Vasanth Nagar, Bangalore-560046 India through its authorised signatory.

                                                                ..Opposite party.

 

 

For the complainant    :       Shri Vikas Bansal, Adv.

For OP                      :       Shri Sanjeev Goyal, Adv.

 

Quorum                                           

Jot Naranjan Singh Gill, President

Sarita Garg, Member

                        Kanwaljeet Singh, Member

 

ORDER

JOT NARANJAN SINGH GILL, PRESIDENT

 

1.             Complainant has preferred the present complaint against the opposite party on the ground that complainant availed the services of the OP by getting insured his Creta 1.6  Six Plus car bearing registration number PB-64-B-0321 from the OP under policy number FPV/12563030 for the period from 14.05.2019 to 13.05.2020 for the insured value of Rs.12,55,860/- after paying the requisite premium of Rs.34497/-.

2.             The case of complainant is that during the intervening night of 4/5.08.2019, the car in question was stolen when it was parked in front of Sunil Readymade Garments, Baba Mast Ram Road, Lehragaga. The complainant informed in this regard to the police and accordingly FIR number 203 dated 5.08.2019 u/s 379 IPC was got registered at PS City Lehra.  Further case of the complainant is that the complainant intimated the OP about the loss of car on 06.08.2019 and the OP allotted claim number 19MO7TGZ and the OP deputed Shri Anurag Midha fact finder for verification and collection of documents regarding the theft claim on 6.8.2019. Further case of complainant is that the police did their best to trace out the lost car of the complainant but the same was not found, at last police officials submitted the report under section 173 Cr PC in the National Lok Adalat, Moonak presided by Shri Gurmehtab Singh, PCS Presiding Officer and  the said court passed the order on 14.12.2019. The grievance of the complainant is that despite the fact the OP was intimated about the loss of the car on 6.8.2019 but the OP released the insurance claim on 30.09.2020 after the period of about 14 months.  It is further averred that the car in question was financed by the HDFC Bank and due to late passing/release of the insurance claim by the OP the complainant had to pay the interest thereon on the loan amount and due to this the complainant suffered heavy mental tension and monetary loss. Thus, alleging deficiency in service on the part of the OP, the complainant has prayed that the OP be directed to pay to the complainant the interest amount which was paid by the complainant to HDFC Bank on remaining loan on 5.8.2019 i.e. the date of loss of the car with interest @ 18% per annum and further claimed compensation and litigation expenses.

3.             In reply filed by the OP,  preliminary objections are taken up on the grounds that the complaint is not maintainable as the OP has already settled the claim and paid the amount of Rs.12,53,860/- and nothing is due against the OP, that the complainant has not impleaded HDFC Bank as a party and that the complainant has failed to set up nexus between the damages claim in the present complaint and the damages suffered by him.  On merits, it is admitted fact that car of the complainant was insured with the OP and theft of the car has also not been denied by the OP. It is further averred that after receipt of the intimation about the theft of the vehicle, the OP appointed Mr. Anurag Midha, an investigator to investigate the genuineness of the claim, who visited the complainant and recorded his statement and thereafter he was advised to submit various documents. The cancellation report was finally accepted by the Court on 14.12.2019 and the certificate from the financer regarding non-repossessing the vehicle was issued on 20.01.2020 and the investigator submitted his report dated 03.03.2020 to the OP concluding that the vehicle was stolen on the intervening night of 4/5.8.2019. It is further submitted that in the meantime due to the pandemic of Covid-19 lockdown was imposed in the entire country and all the officers of the Op were closed and the official were directed to work from home. After getting some relaxation from the lcokdown, the OP wrote letter dated 4.9.2020 to HDFC Bank Limited Sangrur informing that they are going to settle the claim amounting to Rs.12,53,860/- and requested to provide NEFT detail as due to Covil-19 the cheque cannot be processed. After getting the detail from the bank, the OP immediately processed the claim and an amount of Rs.12,53,860/- was credited in the loan account of complainant. The amount was processed immediately as per circumstances mentioned above. However, any deficiency in service on the part of the OP has been denied. Lastly the OP has prayed for dismissal of the complaint with costs.

4.             The learned counsel for the complainant has produced Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-14 copies of documents and affidavit and closed evidence. On the other hand, the learned counsel for OP has produced Ex.OP/1 to Ex.OP/7 copies of documents and affidavit and closed evidence. 

5.             We have gone through the pleadings put in by  the parties along with their supporting documents with their valuable assistance. 

6.             At the outset, it is an admitted fact between the complainant and OP that the car of the complainant was insured with the OP and theft of the car in question on the intervening night on 04/05.08.2019 is also not disputed. It is also not in dispute that the OP appointed investigator who submitted the report. In the present case, the grievance of the complainant is that though the vehicle in question was stolen on the intervening night of 4/5.8.2019 and intimation to this effect was given to the OP immediately, but the OP released the insurance claim amount to the complainant on 30.09.2020 after the period of 14 months. Further the grievance of complainant is that the car in question was financed by the HDFC Bank and due to late passing/release of the insurance claim by the OP the complainant had to pay the interest thereon on the loan amount and by this way the complainant has alleged deficiency in service on the part of the OP.  On the other hand, the stand of the OP is that there is no deficiency in service at all in releasing the payment to the complainant as the cancellation report was finally accepted by the court on 14.12.2019 and the certificate from the financer regarding non repossessing the vehicle was issued on 20.01.2020. We have perused the copy of  untraceable report dated 14.12.2019, Ex.C-12 which shows that the National Lok Adalat, Moonak accepted the untraceable report on 14.12.2019 meaning thereby after submission of documents the OP was to settle the claim within reasonable time as non-repossessing certificate of the vehicle  was issued by the financer on 20.01.2020.  It is worth mentioning here that in the meantime due to the Pandemic of COVID-19 Lockdown was imposed in the entire country and all the offices of the OP were closed and the official were directed to work from home.  We may mention that when the HDFC Bank submitted the details of the account to the OP then the OP immediately transferred the claim amount of Rs.12,53,860/- to the account of the complainant, which fact is not disputed by the complainant.  Further Ex.OP-5 is the copy of letter dated 4.9.2020 issued by the OP to the HDFC Bank Limited Sangrur in response to which the HDFC Bank Limited Sangrur provided the details to pay the amount to the account of complainant is Ex.OP-6.  As such, we find that there is no deficiency in service in settling the claim of the complainant rather it was delayed due to Pandemic of COVID-19. Further this fact is also supported by the affidavit Ex.OP-7 of Shri Rishi Kant, Senior Executive-Legal Claims. In the circumstances, we find no case made out of any deficiency in service on the part of the OP.

7.             In view of our above discussion, we dismiss the complaint case of complainant. However, the parties are left to bear their own costs.

8.             The complaint could not be decided within the statutory time period due to heavy pendency of cases.

9.             Copy of this order be supplied to the parties free of cost. File be consigned to the records after its due compliance. 

                        Pronounced.

 

                August 9. 2024.

 

 

           (Kanwaljeet Singh)  (Sarita Garg)       (Jot Naranjan Singh Gill)

                  Member               Member                           President