DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, NORTH-WEST
GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI
CSC-BLOCK-C, POCKET-C, SHALIMAR BAGH, DELHI-110088.
CC No: 148/2015
D.No._______________________ Dated: ________________
IN THE MATTER OF:
Smt. SUMITRA W/o SH. RAJENDER PARSAD,
R/o C-10, GALI No.27, MAHINDRA PARK,
DELHI-110033.… COMPLAINANT
Versus
1. SHRIRAM TRANSPORT FINANCE Co. LTD.,
(THROUGH ITS MANAGER),
GROUND FLOOR, 431/64/1, LDA-TRUST ESTATE,
KEWAL PARK EXTENSION, AZADPUR, DELHI-110033.
2. SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE Co. LTD.,
(THROUGH ITS MANAGER),
GROUND FLOOR, 431/64/1, LDA-TRUST ESTATE,
KEWAL PARK EXTENSION, AZADPUR, DELHI-110033.
3. SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE Co. LTD.,
(BRANCH OFFICE) (THROUGH ITS MANAGER),
G.D.I.P.L.-TOWER, NETAJI SUBHASH PLACE,
B.G.-08, ROOM No.402-403,
PITAM PURA, NEW DELHI-110034. … OPPOSITE PARTY(IES)
CORAM:SH. M.K. GUPTA, PRESIDENT
SH. BARIQ AHMED, MEMBER
MS. USHA KHANNA, MEMBER
Date of Institution: 28.01.2015
Date of decision:08.03.2019
SH. M.K. GUPTA, PRESIDENT
ORDER
1. The complainant has filed the present complaint against the OPs under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 thereby
CC No.148/2015 Page 1 of 7
alleging that the complainant purchased a vehicle TATA Motors-ACE bearing Registration no. DL-01-LM-9545 from OP-1 for earning her livelihood by means of self-employment and the said vehicle was financed by OP-1 and the insurance premium/amount was also paid at OP-1 office. The complainant further alleged that the said vehicle was driven by the complainant’s son Sh. Sushil Nagar and the said vehicle was insured with the insurance company namely Shriram General Ins. Co. Ltd. bearing policy no. 10003/31/13/412728 for the period from 13.11.2012 to 12.11.2013 (mid-night) and the IDV value of the said vehicle is Rs.2,60,000/-. The complainant further alleged that the said vehicle met with an accident on 14.06.2013 with roadways-bus near Gopalpur Bus Stand, Delhi/Nirankari-Ground, Delhi and the insurance company/agent was informed about the accident and the vehicle was very badly damaged in the said accident. After the accident, the said vehicle was towed to service center and the said vehicle was repaired and a bill of Rs.1,16,356/- was raised which was paid by the complainant and the complainant supplied all relevant documents to OPs but the officials of OPs are not giving response in this matter nor releasing the accident claim of the said vehicle and in this regard, the complainant approached OP’s official uncounted times but there is no response in this matter by their
CC No.148/2015 Page 2 of 7
side nor releasing the claim amount of Rs.1,16,356/- of the said vehicle and only false assurances are given that claim is under process and lastly, the complainant has to arrange the repair amount of the vehicle from friends/relatives. The complainant further alleged that OP failed to pay the claim amount of Rs.1,16,356/- despite repeated requests of the complainant which has great mental tension pain, agony, harassment, inconvenience and loss to the complainant which clearly shows the deficiency in service on the part of the OPs.
2. On these allegations the complainant filed the complaint praying for direction to the OPs to release the claim amount of Rs.1,16,356/- of the said vehicle alongwith interest @ 24% p.a. as well as compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- for causing mental, physical pain, agony and harassment and has also sought Rs.25,000/- cost of litigation.
3. OPs have been contesting the case and filed their separate reply. OP-1 submitted in its reply that there is not even a single word against OP-1 and in the prayer clause of the complaint no relief has been sought against OP-1 and OP-1 is the financer which has provided loan to the complainant and there is no complaint with respect to the said service provided to the complainant.
4. OP-2 & OP-3 submitted that in the reply that the complainant is making false allegations of non-payment of its claim for repair or
CC No.148/2015 Page 3 of 7
insured TATA ACE and the claim of the complainant was paid by OP on making payment to Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. in capacity of the financer of the vehicle as per rules of Indian Motor Tariff and the said payment is calculated by Surveyor and Loss Assessors of OP and as per depreciation prescribed under GR 9 of Indian Motor Tariff which states that:
A. there is provision of 50% depreciation for all rubber, nylon/plastic parts, tyres and tubes, batteries and air bags.
B. Rate of depreciation for all fibre glass components is 30%.
C. Rate if depreciation for all parts of glass is NIL.
5. OP-2 & OP-3 further submitted that there is no deficiency in service on their part as the claim of the complainant was paid to the financer of the vehicle as per rules and regulations.
6. The complainant filed separate rejoinder to reply of OPs and denied the submissions of OPs.
7. In order to prove hercase the complainant filed her affidavit in evidence and the complainant also filed written arguments. The complainant placed on record certificate-cum-policy-schedule no. 10003/31/13/412728 issued by OP-2 & OP-3, copy of receipt dated 15.06.2013 issued by Tinku Body Works and copies of retail invoice no.82/4090-4091 dated 29.06.2013 of Rs.51,756/- issued by G.S. Motors.
8. On the other hand on behalf of OPs,Ms. Varsha Singh,Legal Officer/Authorized Representative of OP-1 and Sh. Rama Raman, of
CC No.148/2015 Page 4 of 7
OP-2 & OP-3 filed their separate affidavitsin evidence which are on the basis of the reply of OP-1, OP-2 & OP-3. OP-2 & OP-3 also filed copy of survey report, copy of Motor Claim Assessment Sheet, copy of Certificate-Cum-Policy-Schedule, copy of receipt and copy of Commercial Vehicles Package Policy. OPs have also filed written arguments.
9. This forum has considered the case of the complainant in the light of evidence of both the parties and documents placed on record by the complainant. The testimony of the complainant has remained consistent and there is nothing on record to disbelieve the case of the complainant. There is no merits in the defence of the OPs. The report of surveyor cannot be considered and believed due to the fact that the surveyor in the report has not specifically reported about the details of calculations as to how the surveyor has come to the conclusion for awarding claim of Rs.20,575/-. The surveyor ought to have mentioned the details for arriving at conclusion for allowing the amount at Rs.20,289/-. The complainant in support of her claim has placed on record copy of insurance policy as well as copies of bills dated 15.06.2013 & 29.06.2013 issued by Tinku Body Works (Denting & Painting) and G.S. Motors of Rs.64,600/- & Rs.51,756/-. These bills contain the charges in respect of front glass with fitting of Rs.3,500/- in duplicate i.e. this item is covered in both the bills. Accordingly, the complainant is not entitled for the
CC No.148/2015 Page 5 of 7
amount of Rs.3,500/-. As the OP has not passed the claim of the complainant, we are of opinion that failure on the part of OP-2 & OP-3 to pay the amount of the loss amounts to deficiency in service. Accordingly, OP-2 & OP-3i.e. Shriram General Insurance Co. Ltd. are held guilty of deficiency in service.
10. Accordingly, OP-2 & OP-3 jointly or severally are directed as under:
i) To pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.1,12,856/- being the loss.
ii) To pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.30,000/- ascompensation towards mental agony and harassment caused to the complainant.
iii) To pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.10,000/- as cost of litigation.
11. The above amount shall be paid by the OP-2 & OP-3 jointly or severally to the complainant within 30 days from the date of receiving copy of this order failing which OP-2 & OP-3 shall be liable to pay interest on the entire awardedamount @ 10% per annum from the date of receiving copy of this order till the date of payment. If OP-2 & OP-3 fail to comply with the order within 30 days from the date of receiving copy of this order, thecomplainant may approach this Forum u/s 25 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
CC No.148/2015 Page 6 of 7
12. Let a copy of this order be sent to each party free of cost as per regulation 21 of the Consumer Protection Regulations, 2005. Thereafter file be consigned to record room.
Announced on this 8th day of March, 2019.
BARIQ AHMED USHA KHANNA M.K. GUPTA
(MEMBER) (MEMBER) (PRESIDENT)
CC No.148/2015 Page 7 of 7
