Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rohtak.
Complaint No. : 278
Instituted on : 10.06.2019
Decided on : 09.05.2024.
Hawa Singh s/o Ramphal R/o Flat no.49, Vidya Sagar Apartment, plot no.34, Sector-6, Dawarka, New Delhi.
………..Complainant.
Vs.
- Tata AIG General Insurance Company Ltd. Branch Rohtak through its Branch Manager, 2nd floor, Narayana Complex, Civil Road Rohtak Tehsil & Distt. Rohtak.
- Tata AIG General Insurance Company Ltd. through its Branch Manager, 2nd Floor, SCO-232-234, Sec-34-A, Chandigarh-160022.
…….Respondents/Opposite parties.
COMPLAINT U/S 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT
BEFORE: SH.NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT.
DR. TRIPTI PANNU, MEMBER.
DR.VIJENDER SINGH, MEMBER.
Present: Sh.J.S.Kadian, Advocate for the complainant.
Sh.Gulshan Chawla, Advocate for the opposite parties.
ORDER
NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT:
1. Brief facts of the case as per the complainant are that he is registered owner of Vehicle No.DL-9CAA-2101 which was insured with the opposite parties vide policy no.0100994654. On 28.06.2017 when the complainant was returning from Dharamshala to Delhi, there was heavy rainfall on the way and when he reached village Basal, Near Una(H.P) the insured vehicle broke down due to water logging and the same was intimated to respondent. The insured vehicle was got repaired at M/s Krishna Auto Mobile Chandigarh and an amount of Rs.168147/- was incurred on account of the repair on insured vehicle. The surveyor authorized by the opposite parties also inspected the vehicle. The respondents informed the complainant vide letter dated 30.08.2017 that they were not liable for the losses to the insured vehicle and tried to avoid the liability. The act and conduct of non settling of the claim under the above policy is illegal and there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties. Hence this complaint and it is prayed that opposite parties may kindly be directed to release the amount of Rs.168147/- as expenses incurred upon the insured vehicle and also to pay Rs.300000/- as exemplary compensation for causing mental agony and harassment to the complainant.
2. After registration of complaint, notices were issued to the opposite parties. Opposite parties in their reply has submitted that on receipt of claim intimation opposite parties registered the claim and deputed an independent surveyor Sh.Mohit Sharma to assess the loss to the vehicle. The complainant mentioned cause of loss in the claim form as “While driving from Dharmshala to Delhi, there was heavy rainfall on the way and due to water logging, the vehicle broke down”. The surveyor provided tentative assessment of loss based on his survey to the tune of Rs.179681/-. However the complainant had not provided any bills towards repairs/replacement of parts of the said vehicle hence only tentative assessment was arrived by the surveyor based on his inspection of the vehicle. The surveyor submitted the report dated 28.08.2017 with following remarks: “Insured claimed for damage to DDE(Control unit). During inspection no physical damage is seen on the said control unit as no traces of water was present in DDE CO(Control Unit). Hence does not fall under any of perils mentioned in the policy. It seems that this might got damaged due to normal wear and tear(mechanical failure) which is not covered under the preview of motor insurance company. In view of this we recommend this claim for repudiation”. The opposite party served letters dated 30.08.2017 and 18.09.2017 to complainant and invited comments of the complainant but the complainant did not provide satisfactory justification. Hence the claim of the complainant was repudiated vide their letter dated 11.01.2018 and the same was informed to the complainant. All the other contents of the complaint were stated to be wrong and denied and opposite parties 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.C16 and closed his evidence on 26.11.2021. Ld. Counsel for opposite parties in their evidence has tendered affidavit Ex.RW1/A, Ex.RW1/B, documents Ex.R1 to Ex.R6 and closed their evidence on 30.05.2022.
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 claim of the complainant has been repudiated by the opposite party vide its letter dated 30.08.2017 placed on record as Ex.C13 on the ground that : “As per observation of surveyor, during thorough inspection of your damaged vehicle, he did not find any physical external damage on the DDE co(Control Unit). It seems that damages to said Control Unit are caused due to normal wear and tear(mechanical failure) which does not fall under the preview of the standard motor policy. In view of the above we wish draw your attention on the exclusion 2(a) under Section 1 of the policy that reads as under: The company shall not be liable to make any payment in respect of: Consequential loss, depreciation, wear and tear, mechanical or electrical break down, failures or breakages”. We have perused the documents placed on record by both the parties. Regarding the plea taken by the opposite parties that damages to the Control Unit are caused due to normal wear and tear, we have observed the repair bill Ex.C11, as per which it is submitted in the description column that: “Vehicle does not start/water ingress in DDE unit”. Meaning thereby the damage to the DDE unit was caused by ingression of rain water in the DDE unit and not due to normal wear and tear. Hence the repudiation of claim by the opposite parties on this ground is illegal and amounts to deficiency in service. As such opposite parties are liable to pay the claim amount to the complainant. As per survey report Ex.R3 the surveyor has assessed the loss of Rs.179681/- but the complainant has demanded a sum of Rs.168147/- and has placed on record the receipts Ex.C5 & Ex.C6 amounting to Rs.48147/- and Rs.120000/- respectively issued by Krishna Automobiles. As such opposite parties are liable to pay the amount of Rs.168147/- to the complainant.
6. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, we hereby allow the complaint and direct the opposite parties to pay Rs.168147/-(Rupees one lac sixty eight thousand one hundred and forty seven only) alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing the present complaint i.e. 10.06.2019 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.
7. 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:
09.05.2024.
.....................................................
Nagender Singh Kadian, President
..........................................
Tripti Pannu, Member.
..........................................
Vijender Singh, Member.
