DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION ROPAR
Consumer Complaint No.79 of 2021
Date of institution: 22.10.2021
Date of Decision: 27.06.2022
- Ms. Shama Rani aged about 55 years, widow of Shri Roshan Lal, resident of Village & PO Thana, Tehsil Sri Anandpur Sahib, District Rupnagar.
- Ms. Pooja widow of Deepak Sharma son of Roshan Lal
- Dhanu Sharma, aged about 16 month minor daughter of Deepak Sharma, living under the care and guardianship of her mother Ms. Pooja.
…….Complainants
Versus
- TATA AIG General Insurance Company Limited, A-501, 5th Floor, Building No.4, Infinity IT Park, Gen. A.K. Vaidya Marg, Didoshi Malad (East), Mumbai-400097.
- The Manager, TATA AIG General Insurance Company, 1/F Dashmesh Complex, SCO-668, Pakhowal Road, Ludhiana
……..Opposite Parties
Complaint under Consumer Protection Act.
Quorum: Shri Ranjit Singh, President.
Smt. Ranvir Kaur, Member
Present: Sh. Ram Avtar, Adv. counsel for complainant
O.Ps. ex-parte.
Order dictated by :- Shri Ranjit Singh, President
Order
The present order of ours will dispose of the above complaint filed under Consumer Protection Act, by the complainant against the Opposite Parties on the ground that son of the complainant namely Deepak Sharma son of Late Shri Roshan Lal was the registered owner of the TATA LPT-3118 TC, Truck open body bearing registration No. PB-12-M-7925. The said truck was insured with the OPs No.1 & 2 vide policy No.0161835502 and the same is valid from 19.02.2021 to 18.2.2022. As per the insurance policy, address of the OP No.2 is mentioned as 1/F, Dashmesh Complex, SCO 668, Pakhowal Road, Ludhiana, when after the accident, the intimation with regard to the death of Deepak Sharma was sent at the address of insurance company at 1/F, Dashmesh Complex, SCO 668, Pakhowal Road, Ludhiana-Punjab. Then the complainant received a letter from Dr. Sandhya, Claimants-A&T, TATA AIG General Insurance Company Limited, vide which she has directed the complainant fill the claim form along with necessary documents. The letter is Ex.C/3 to avoid further complications both addresses of OP No.1 & 2 is written in the complaint. As per the terms and conditions of the policy, Deepak Sharma, since deceased was insured for the sum of Rs.15,00,000/- under the limits of all liability under section II-1 (i) of policy (Death of or bodily injury). Deepak Sharma has purchased the said truck for earning of his livelihood and driving the same by self driving. On 04.03.2021, Deepak Sharma along with his helper namely Shri Bhupinder Singh son of Darshan Singh, resident of Village Fatehpur Bunga, PS Sri Kiratpur Sahib, District Rupnagar loaded his truck/traula bearing No.PB-12M-7925 from Tripura with rubber for Jalandhar. It is further alleged that in the morning on 13.3.2021, when Deepak Sharma while driving his truck/traula along with his helper Bhupinder Singh, reached within the revenue limits of Bhewa (Pehowa) then Bhupinder Singh told to Deepak Sharma that his in laws are residing at village Thaska Mira, Ismyala Bad (Haryana) and he is to give Rs.20,000/- to his father in laws namely Shri Surinder Singh son of Shri Saudagar Singh and for this purpose, Deepak Sharma stopped the truck at about 1.30 AM on the Ismaylabad bye pass and his helper Bhupinder Singh went to this in laws house. In the meantime, Deepak Sharma checked oil and water in the engine of this truck. Thereafter, he started the process of tiding the ropes of the tarpals for purpose to tide the tarpals. All of sudden his foot slipped from the dala of the said truck and he fell on the road, result of which the backside of Deepak Sharma struck against the road and on falling Deepak Sharma informed his helper Bhupinder Singh to reach at the spot and after taking some rest both left for Jalandhar at about 2.00 AM. At about 11.30 AM, when Deepak Sharma along with his truck reached at Rupnagar Jalandhar bye pass then he feel that lower part of his body is going to become senseless/numb. Then after parking his truck on the roadside, Bhupinder Singh helper got admitted Deepak Sharma in Dr. Surjit Hospital, Rupnagar, which is situated on the Rupnagar-Jalandhar byepass road. On examination the doctors of Dr. Surjit Hospital, Rupnagar, referred Deepak Sharma to PGIMER, Chandigarh, where he remained admitted and was operated but he died on 19.3.2021 at about 12.30 PM. The complainant is not so qualified and is not fully conversant with the legal proceeding that is why she has engaged an advocate and directed him to persue the death claim of the complainant and supplied all required documents, so the claim of the claimant be settled by the insurance company as early as possible. Counsel for the claimant send an intimation letter with regard to the dearth of Deepak Sharma and intimation letter returned back with the remarks left. Thereafter one letter dated 28.5.2021 was received by the complainant, which was send by Dr. Sandhya, Claims-A&T. Thereafter on receiving, counsel for the complainant again sent all the required documents to Dr. Sandhya, claim was duly filled and send the same to Dr. Sandhya along with letter dated 4.8.2021. but no response and intimation was given to the complainant for settlement of death claim of her son namely Deepak Sharma.
Thus, alleging deficiency in service on the part of OPs. for the said act and conduct, the complainant has sought the following relief:-
- To direct the OPs to make the payment of Rs.15,00,000/- along with interest @ 8% per annum from the date of accident till its realization
- To pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation and litigation charges on account of physical and harassment.
- Any other relief may kindly be given to the complainant which this Hon’ble Commission deems fit according the facts and circumstances of the case.
2. On being put to the notice, none appeared on behalf of O.Ps. Accordingly, the OPs were proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 03.02.2022
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the complainant and have gone through the record file, carefully and minutely.
4. Since, all the allegations of the complainant are un-rebutted, un-challenged and no one has come forward to contest the claim of the complainant. We have no alternative except to appreciate the complaint as well as the evidence of the complainant, which appears to be cogent, reliable and trustworthy. It is on the file that the Deepak Sharma son of Late Shri Roshan Lal was the registered owner of the TATA LPT-3118 TC bearing registration. PB-12-M-7925. The said truck was insured with the OPs No.1 & 2 vide policy No.0161835502 and the same is valid from 19.02.2021 to 18.2.2022. It is pertinent to mention here that after the death of Deepak Sharma (owner) the OPs failed to make the payment of claim amount of Rs.15,00,000/- under Section III: PA to Owner CSI: as per insurance policy, which we feel is definitely a deficiency in services on the part of the O.Ps. In support of his version, the complainant has placed on record various documents i.e Death Certificate, Insurance policy, correspondence between the complainant and insurance company.
5. Since the OP has chosen to remain ex-parte and otherwise the evidence of the complainant appears to be cogent, reliable and trustworthy. It is, proved on the file that the after cancellation of the flight, the OP failed to refund the amount to the complainant.
6. It is pertinent to mention here that the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, is benevolent legislation enacted to help the consumers, which are being regularly harassed by the unscrupulous traders. We feel that the very purpose of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, will fail if such types of traders are not brought to book and asked to pay compensation.
7. The learned counsel for the complainant has placed on record the judgment of Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court, in FAO No.424 of 2013, decided on 31.01.2013 in case titled as United India Insurance Company Limited Vs Sumitra. He also placed on the record the judgment of Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh High Court, in AAO No.452 of 1989, decided on 24.12.1993 in case titled as Khairullah and Anr Vs Anita.
8. No doubt, the complainant felt harassed with this act of the OPs. So we are of the opinion that complainant is entitled for claim amount. The complainant is also entitled to compensation for the harassment suffered in the hands of the OPs. We feel, that the O.Ps. had no cogent, reliable or any trustworthy reason to delay the refund of the air ticket amount to the complainant
8. The present Act envisages provisions for product liability action on account of harm caused to consumers due to a defective product or policy or by deficiency in service.
9. In view of the law laid down by the complainant and discussion made above, the present complaint is allowed. The OPs are directed to make the payment of Rs.15,00,000/- along with interest @ 7% per annum from the date of death of Deepak Sharma to the complainant. Further, the O.Ps are burdened to pay an amount of compensation to the tune of Rs.35,000/- to the CC. Further, the OP is also directed to pay Rs.15,000/- as litigation expenses. The OP is further directed to comply with the above said order within a period of 30 days from the date of receiving of certified copy of this order. Free certified copies of this order be sent to the parties, as per rules. The files be consigned to record room.
June, 27 2022
(Ranjit Singh)
(Ranvir Kaur)
