Haryana

Panipat

CC/133/2022

Sumit Khanna - Complainant(s)

Versus

TATA AIG General Insurance Company Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Sh. Jaspal Ghangas

12 Oct 2023

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
PANIPAT
 
Complaint Case No. CC/133/2022
( Date of Filing : 27 Apr 2022 )
 
1. Sumit Khanna
(aged 27 years) son of Sh. Satish resident of Padav Mohalla, Near Nursing Sadan, Samalkha, Distt. Panipat, Haryana, Aadhar No. 5134 1963 0548.
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. TATA AIG General Insurance Company Ltd.
Having its regd. office at Peninsula, Business Park, Tower-A, 15th Floor, G.K. Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400013, Maharashtra, India through its M.D./ authorized signatory.
2. TATA AIG General Insurance Company Ltd.
Having its branch office Unit No.5, 2nd Floor, N.K. Tower, G.T. Road, Panipat-132103 through its Branch Manager/ Authorized signatory.
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
  Dr. R. K. Dogra PRESIDENT
  Dr. Suman Singh MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
Shri Jaspal Ghangas, Adocate for complainant.
......for the Complainant
 
Shri Rajnish Kumar Trehan, Advocate for opposite party No.1.
Opposite Party No.2 ex parte vide order dated 05.07.2022.
......for the Opp. Party
Dated : 12 Oct 2023
Final Order / Judgement

No evidence of complainant is present. A date is requested on behalf of the complainant, which is opposed. Heard. This case is continuing for evidence of the complainant from 13.12.2022 and today is last opportunity on payment of costs Rs.500/-. Even cost has not been paid by the complainant and no efforts has been made by the complainant to produce the evidence. Moreso, the complainant has already availed six effective opportunities including last opportunity. Hence, there are no sufficient grounds for adjourning this case for the purpose of the evidence of the complainant. Hence, the evidence of the complainant is hereby closed by order of this Commission.

 2.               This complaint has been filed against the respondents seeking claim of Rs.90,464/- i.e. medi-claim incurred by the complainant alongwith compensation to the tune of Rs.55,000/- alongwith Rs.22,000/- as litigation expenses  as the claim of the complainant has not been given by the respondents. In written statement, it is submitted by the respondents that the respondents have repudiated the claim of the complainant as per report of investigator who submitted his report to the Competent Authority and after perusing the report, the Competent Authority repudiated the claim under Section 4(6) of the policy terms and conditions. All the other allegations of the complaint have been denied by the respondents and dismissal of the complaint was prayed for.

3.                As the complainant has come before this Commission for seeking relief, the onus was on the complainant to prove his case by adducing cogent and convincing evidence. Since the complainant has not produced any evidence on record despite several effective opportunities as stated above and hence, there is no iota of evidence on record to substantiate the allegations of the complaint. Hence, the present complaint is hereby dismissed in lacking of evidence. However, both the parties are left to bear their own costs.

4.                 This order be communicated to the parties free of costs and file be consigned to the record-room.

 
 
[ Dr. R. K. Dogra]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[ Dr. Suman Singh]
MEMBER
 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.