Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rohtak.
Complaint No. : 258
Instituted on : 28.04.2022
Decided on : 07.02.2024.
Pawan age 31 years s/o Randhir Singh, R/o Seman (115), Rohtak, SamanDistt. Rohtak at present RZ-868 Prem Nagar Najafgarh South West Delhi-110043.
………..Complainant.
Vs.
Tata AIG General Insurance Company Ltd. 2nd floor SCO-35, Sec-14, Gurgaon Distt. Gurgaon through its Manager.
…….Respondent/Opposite party.
COMPLAINT U/S 35 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT
BEFORE: SH.NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT.
DR. TRIPTI PANNU, MEMBER.
Present: Sh. Shakti Singh Khatri, Advocate for the complainant.
Sh.Gulshan Chawla, Advocate for the opposite party.
ORDER
NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT:
1. Brief facts of the case as per the complainant are that he is registered owner of Honda CIVIK car bearing no.DL3CBM4619 and the same is insured with respondent vide policy no.310065634100 from 19.10.2020 to 18.10.2021 and the insured amount is Rs.660000/-. On 10.10.2021 Sachin s/o Karambir, friend of the complainant was going from his village Attayalto village Balianaand due to short circuit in the engine of car, the car was totally burnt. Complainant made a telephonic call on 112 number and also make a call to the police. The police and fire brigade reached at the spot but till then the car was totally burnt. A DD No.018 dated 14.10.2021 was.registered in PS SamplaDistt. Rothak. Complainant also gave information to the opposite party. Officials of the opposite party visited the spot and completed all the requisite formalities. The vehicle was also inspected on the spot by the surveyor and photographs of the damaged vehicle were taken by the surveyor. As per the direction of the surveyor, the complainant took his car at Vishwkarma Motors Shop no.17 Rajiv Nagar Gurugram, who gave the estimate of repair of the car Rs.1318148/-. All the required documents were submitted to the insurance company. After some time surveyor of the insurance company again visited the house of complainant and told that the insurance company has settled the claim and Rs.660000/- will be paid to the complainant within a week and he obtained the signatures of the complainant on some blank papers after stating that it is a procedure for settlement of claim. But the opposite party neither paid the compensation nor repudiated the claim. The act and conduct of the opposite partiy is illegal and amounts to deficiency in service. Hence this complaint and it is prayed that opposite party may kindly be directed to pay Rs.660000/- and also to payRs.20000/- as compensation on account of mental agony and harassment alongwith interest @ 18% p.a. to the complainant.
2. After registration of complaint, notice was issued to the opposite party. Opposite party in its reply has submitted that it is wrong that the vehicle in question was burnt while in running/driving position. On the basis of the investigation and surveyor report, it is crystal clear that an unsuccessful attempt has been made by the complainant for getting the false enrichment. The vehicle in question has been intentionally put to fire. It is denied that any estimate amounting to Rs.1318148/- was provided. It is also denied that the company has settled his claim for a sum of Rs.660000/-. All the other contents of the complaint were stated to be wrong and denied and opposite party prayed for dismissal of complaint with costs.
3. Ld. counsel for the complainant in his evidence has tendered affidavit Ex.CW1/A, documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C15 and closed his evidence on 21.04.2023. Ld. Counsel for opposite party in its evidence has tendered affidavit Ex.RW1/A, documents Ex.R1 to Ex.R4 and thereafter failed to conclude their evidence despite availing sufficient opportunities. Hence the evidence of opposite party was closed by the order dated 22.12.2023 of this Commission.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through material aspects of the case very carefully.
5. In the present case two reports have been placed on record by the insurance company as Ex.R2 dated 26.01.2022 and Ex.R3 dated 05.05.2022. Ex.R3 is issued by surveyor and Ex.R2 is investigation report. As per Ex.R2 surveyor has made some objections. After perusal of written statement and survey report placed on record by the respondent, we have observed that no conclusive evidence has been placed on record to prove these reports. Moreover the observations are merely observations and have no legal authenticity. These observations should be supported with some technical reports but the same are missing in this case. All the other relevant documents are submitted with the insurance company. As per report Ex.R3 the assessment has been made on different mode of assessments i.e.
1. Assessment on repair basis, the loss is assessed as Rs.803402/-.
2. Assessment on total loss basis, the net loss is assessed as Rs.658000/-,
3. Assessment on net of salvage loss basis with RC as Rs.635000/-,
4. Assessment on Net of Salvage basis without RC Rs.640000/-.
The surveyor has submitted that the most economical mode of settlement of the insurance is net of salvage basis i.e. Rs.640000/- without RC -and made some objections without any supporting documents or reports i.e. mechanical, technical & legal. Hence the complainant is entitled for IDV of the vehicle(Rs.660000/-)on net of salvage basis without RC after deducting the wreck value of the vehicle Rs.18000/-and policy excess clause Rs.2000/- i.e. Rs.640000/-.
6. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, we hereby allow the complaint and direct the opposite party to pay Rs.640000/-(Rupees six lac forty thousand only)alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing the present complaint i.e. 28.04.2022 till its realisation and also to pay 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 complainant within one month from the date of decision. However complainant is directed to move an application to the Registration Authority for cancellation of RC within 15 days.
8. 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:
07.02.2024.
.....................................................
Nagender Singh Kadian, President
..........................................
TriptiPannu, Member.
