Karnataka

Chitradurga

CC/174/2018

Dr.K.M.Shoba W/o Dr.S.Ujjanappa - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Authorised Signatory,The New India Assurance Co Ltd., - Opp.Party(s)

Sri.P.S. Sathyanarayana Rao

24 Sep 2019

ORDER

COMPLAINT FILED ON:22/09/2018

DISPOSED      ON:24/09/2019

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHITRADURGA.

CC.NO:174/2018

DATED: 24^th  September 2019

PRESENT :-     Smt. C.M.Chanchala.                     …. President

                           B.A.L.,,LL.B.,                 

                            

                        SRI. SHIVAKUMAR.K.N    :              MEMBER

                     M.Com., LL.B.,

 

……COMPLAINANT/S	Smt. 1. K.M. Shobha w/o S. Ujjanappa, # 211/A, 6th Cross, JCR Extension, Chitradurga Owner of the Maruthi Celerio Car, Bearing Regn., No. KA-16-N-2711 (Rep., by Sri. P.S. Sathyanarayana, Advocate)
V/S
…..OPPOSITE PARTY	1. Authorized Signatory, The New India Assurance Company Limited, Branch Office, ‘Vijayashree’ B.D. road, Chitradurga. (Rep., by Sri.K. Mohan Bhat, Advocate) 2. The Project Director, National Highway Authority of India, N.H.4, Hubli, Dharwad District. (Rep., by Sri. B. Prasanna Kumar, Advocate) 3. The Authorised Signaory, Saketh Automobiles, Oppt., Yathri Nivas, Medehally road, N.H. 4, Chitradurga 577 501. (In person) 4. Sri. Narasimha Murthy Authorised Agent, New India Assurance Company Limited, Branch Office Vijayashree B.D.  road, Chitradurga.            (Rep., by Sri. D. Naveena, Advocate)

 

Pronounced on 24^th  of September  2019  .

Written by C.M. Chanchala, President.

 

ORDERS

1.    This is a complaint of alleged deficiency of service filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986 by Dr. K.M.Shobha the Complainant against the Opposite parties (for short ‘OPs’ ) praying for payment of Rs.36,800/- with interest and Rs.2 lakhs for compensation towards mental agony and Rs.5000/- cost of the proceeding - etc.

The Complaint:

2.  The case of the complainant is that she is the owner of the car Maruthi LMV Celerio bearing reg.No.KA 16-N-2711 and the said vehicle has insured with the OPs Company vide policy No. 68050231180100002112 Dt: 29-05-2018 which is valid from 30-05-2018 to 29-05-2019. Her further case is that on 26-08-2018 when she returning from Dharwad, at about 6.30 pm, near Todas cross, the vehicle was stopped and not started due to leakage of oil, then the said vehicle was brought to R.N.S Motors Ltd, Hubli by towing and the same got repaired on 27-08-2018 and she had spent Rs.1,800/- for repair and Rs.5000/- for towing the said vehicle to the R.N.S Motors Ltd, Hubli, thereafter, she filed a claim form with the OP through phone, but they have not response.

3.  The complainant further stated that on 08-09-2018 the Saketh Automobiles, Authorized Maruthi Service Centre, Chitradurga has given estimate for undertaking repair to the tune of Rs. 30,000/-, she has intimated the same to OP, but it has not response to her request, hence she alleged deficiency of service on the part of OP. She also alleged that the incident occurred due to poor maintenance of the NHAI by OP2 hence, she also claiming compensation from OP No.1 and 2.

4.      After hearing on admission the complaint was admitted and  notice were ordered to be issued to the OPs  to file their written versions under section 13(2) of the Consumer Protection Act,1986 (  in short “the Act) . The OP 1 to 4 have appeared through their counsel and filed written version.

Defense:

5.    OP No.1and 4 have filed separate written version by denying all the allegation made in the complaint and they further contended that they have not received any intimation of claim letter from the complainant due to car sustained damage. They further contended that after sustained damage, it is the duty of the complainant to file written claim form along with policy copy, RC, permit, DL of the driver who was driving at the time of accident and also to mention cause of the accident in the claim form. But the complainant has not produced the above said documents with claim form further she also not intimated the above said incident within 24 hours to the OP No.1 and 4 and hence there is no deficiency of service from them.

6.  OP 2 has denied all the allegation made against them in the complaint and prayed for dismiss the complaint.

7.   OP 3 has denied all the allegation made against them in the complaint and further contended that on 08-09-2018 the complainant brought her car in question to their showroom with a complaint alleging there is abnormal noise in the engine and after inspection the car, the technical expert noticed the engine sound and undertaken proper repair and in this regard job card also issued. He further contended that estimation is issued for Rs. 30,000/- but after repair the final bill of      Rs. 23,739/- has paid by the complainant and took delivery of car on 21-09-2018. Hence there is no deficiency of service from them, accordingly, he prayed for dismiss the complaint. 

Evidence :

8.      The complainant got herself examined as PW-1 by filing her affidavit as a part of examination in chief and though she has produced documents before the forum, same have not been marked as exhibits.

9.    On behalf of OP No.1 one A.V. Chandrashekaraiah, Branch manager got himself examined as RW-1 by filing his affidavit as a part of examination in chief and also got Ex.R-1 to R-3 marked. On behalf of OP No.2 one Kiran Gubbannavar, professional technician got himself examined as RW-2 by filing his affidavit as a part of examination in chief, 3^rd OP has not filed his affidavit evidence, and on behalf of OP No.4 one Narasimhamurthy, Agent of OP No.1 got examined himself as RW-3 by filing his affidavit as a part of examination in chief and closed the evidence.

Arguments:

10.    We have heard the complainant as well as OPs and perused the written arguments filed by the advocates.  

11.    The points that arise for our determination are;

1. Whether the complainant proves that deficiency of service on the part of opponents?

2. Whether the complainant proves that he is entitled for the relief sought?

3. What order?

12.    Our finding on the above points are as under;

          Point No.1: In the Negative.

          Point No2: In the Negative.

          Point No3: As per final order,

Discussion and Reasoning:

Point No.1 and 2:

 

 13.  The complainant alleged that on 26-08-2018 when she returning from Dharwad, at about 6.30 pm, near Todas cross, her vehicle was stopped and not started due to leakage of oil, then the said vehicle was brought to R.N.S Motors Ltd, Hubli by towing and the same got repaired on 27-08-2018 and she had spent Rs.1,800/- for repair and Rs.5000/- for towing the said vehicle to the R.N.S Motors Ltd, Hubli, thereafter, she filed a claim form with the OP through phone, but they have not response. She further alleged that on 08-09-2018 the Saketh Automobiles, Authorized Maruthi Service Centre, Chitradurga has given estimate for undertaking repair to the tune of Rs. 30,000/-, she has intimated the same to OP, but it has not response to her request, hence she alleged deficiency of service on the part of OPs.

14.   The 1^st and 4^th OP contended that they have not received any intimation of claim letter from the complainant due to car sustained damage and after sustained damage, it is the duty of the complainant to file written claim form along with policy copy, RC , permit, DL of the driver who was driving at the time of accident and also to mention cause of the accident in the claim form, but the complainant has not produced the above said documents with claim form further she also not intimated the above said incident within 24 hours to the OP No.1 and 4 and hence there is no deficiency of service from them.

15.   First up all, documents produced by the complainant have not been marked as Exhibits. But they are taken consideration for proper adjudication of the matter. The complainant has not produced copy of insurance, however, the OP- 1 produced Copy of the policy which shows that policy is valid from 30-05-2018, 12:00:01 am to 29-05-2019, and 11:59: 59 pm. The complainant alleged that incidence occurred on 26-08-2018 at about 6.30 pm. Hence it proves that on the date of incident policy is in force.

16.     Further OP-1 and 4 strongly contended that the complainant has not filed claim form with required documents before them within 24 hours. The complainant has not produced any copy of the Claim intimation letter furnished to the OP 1 and 4. But OP No.1 has produced the claim intimation letter as EX- B3. In the said document it has mentioned that date and time of accident is on 16-06-2018 at around 8.30 pm, spot of accident is near Ramagiri, Holalkere, Chitradurga and same was filed by one Dr. Santhosh on 18-06-2018.

17.    As per the complaint incident occurred on 26-08-2018 at about 6.30 pm and as per the claim form incident occurred on 16-06-2018 at around 8.30 pm and claim filed on 18-06-2018. The complainant has not explained if the incident was occurred on 26-08-2018, why she has filed the claim form on 18-06-2018 that too before the incident. Further place of accident mentioned in the claim form and complaint is totally deferent each other.  On reading of the contents of documents and statement made in the complaint are totally contradictory to each other.

18.   Further, Job card produced by the complainant Dtd: 08-09-2018 shows that the vehicle was sent to OP No.3 with a complaint of abnormal noise and estimation is issued for Rs. 30,000/- and Tax invoice shows that final bill of Rs. 23,739/- has paid by the complainant and took delivery of car on 21-09-2018. There is no documents produced by the complainant to prove regarding the occurrence of alleged incident. The documents produced by the parties clearly proves that the complainant by taking undue advantage of insurance policy has filed the present complaint against the OPs with intention to grab the public money and thereby she wasted the precious time of the forum which should be punishable under law.  Accordingly, we answered these point in the Negative.

Point No.3:-

19.   As the complainant failed to prove deficiency of service on the part of the OPs, she is not entitled for the reliefs claimed in the complaint. Accordingly, we answered this point as follows.

                                      : ORDER:

The present complaint is dismissed.

The complainant is directed to deposit a fine of Rs. 10,000/- to the account of consumer welfare fund within 30 days from the date of this order. In case of non-compliance of the order the entire amount shall carry interest @ 10% per annum till its realization. If the complainant failed to comply the order, office is directed to take steps against them in accordance with law for execute the order.

Both parties shall bear their own cost.

The assistant registrar is directed to send free copies of this order to the all the parties free of cost within a week from today.

 

(Dictated to the Stenographer, typescript edited, corrected and then pronounced in the open court this  24th  day of September 2019)

 

MEMBER

PRESIDENT.

             

ANNEXURE

Witness examined for the complainant side:

 

Complainant- Smt. Dr. K.M. Shobha, has examined-in-chief by filing affidavit as PW1.

Documents marked for the complainant side:

Nil

Witness examined for the opponents 1 to 3 side:

 

Witness examined for the opponents 1:

RW-1:- A.V. Chandrashekaraiah by filing affidavit evidence.

Witness examined for the opponents: OP 2

RW-2:- Kiran Gubbannavar by filing affidavit evidence.

Witness examined for the opponents: OP 3

RW-3:- Narasimha Murthy by filing affidavit evidence.

Witness examined for the opponents: OP 4

Nil

Documents marked for the opponents 1:

01	Ex-R-1:-	Policy copy
02	Ex-R-2:-	Claim form dated 10/08/2018
03	Ex-R -3:-	Claim form dated 31/01/2019

 

 

Documents marked for the opponents  3

01	Ex-R-1:-	Xerox copy of Estimate
02	Ex-R-2:-	Xerox copy of pre invoice
03	Ex-R-3:-	Xerox copy of Tax Invoice.
04	Ex-R-4:-	Xerox copy of satisfaction report.

 

 

Documents marked for the opponents 2  and  4  side:

-nil-

 

        (C.M.Chanchala  )

                       President.

                                                                                     

 

 

           ( Shivakumar K.N )

                                                                                     Member.