Presented by Miss B.L. Dora, Member . <br /> In this case, the Complainant has purchased a Maruti Alto LX BS III bearing Regd. No. OR-17-E-5152, Engine No. 4177853, Chassis No. 913788, with the financial assistance of Opposite Party No.2(two), who is a financier and insured the vehicle with Opposite Party No.1(one) by paying the required premium vide insurance Policy No.2152337, issued by the Maruti Insurance Brokers Ltd. who is the Corporate Agent of the Opposite Party No.1(one). The validity period for the said policy was valid from 11:11:13 A.M. on Dt. 24th May 2007 to midnight on 23rd May, 2008, issued for sum insured amount (IDV) of Rs.2,63,183/-(Rupees two lac sixty three thousand one hundred eighty three)only.<br /> <br /> During the subsistence period of policy on Dt. 27/03/2008 at about 4 P.M., the vehicle met with an accident with a Truck bearing Regd No. WB-23-7525 on N.H.6, near Siva Temple of village Suktapali. An F.I.R was lodged at Attabira Police Station as F.I.R. No. 56 (23) Dt. 27/03/2008. In this accident, the vehicle was completely damaged and the Complainant with other occupant of the vehicle sustained injuries. The matter of accident was informed to the Opposite Party No.1(one) on the next date. The Opposite Party No.1(one) had deputed one surveyor Sri Dhirendra Dash to conduct survey. After completion of survey, the complainant had shifted the vehicle to the authorized service centre Odisi Motors, Sambalpur.<br /> <br /> The Opposite Party No.2(two) being the financer of the vehicle was also informed about the accident, damaged caused to the vehicle with insurance policy and injuries sustained by the Complainant over telephone. The Opposite Party No.2(two) is the co-owner of the vehicle. But the Opposite Parties did not take any steps in this matter and the Opposite Party No.2(two) instead of taking any steps pressed the Complainant for repayment of the loan..<br /> <br /> The Complainant is under going treatment for a long period could not be able to pursue the claim and in these days the Opposite Party No.1(one) remained silent over it, did not preferred to communicate with the Complainant to settle the claim. There after the Complainant approached the Opposite Party No.1(one) and requested several times for early settlement of the claim which has no result. Then the Complainant served a letter on the Opposite Party No.1(one) on Dt. 06/07/2009 through registered post with A.D. the A.D. of which was not returned to the Complainant by the postal department. The Opposite Party remained silent on receiving of the above letter also amounts deficiency in service on their part for which the Opposite Party No.1(one) is liable to indemnify the Complainant, the sum assured amount i.e. 2,63,183/-(Rupees two lac sixty three thousand one hundred eighty three)only. The non-taking steps by Opposite Party No.2(two) to pursue the claim before the Opposite Party No.1(one) is deficiency in service and unfair trade practice under the provision of Consumer Protection Act-1986.<br /> <br /> Due to these act of the Opposite Parties the Complainant has suffered with heavy financial loss, mental agony, physical pain and harassment. In order to strengthen his case the Complainant has filed the xerox copy of the Insurance Policy vide No. 2152337, xerox copy of the R.C. Book, copy of letter Dt. 06/07/2009 with postal receipt, copy of P.S. F.I.R. No.56 (23) Dt.27/03/2008.<br /> <br /> Complainant prays that, the Opposite Party be directed jointly and severally to indemnify Rs. 2,63,183/-(Rupees two lac sixty three thousand one hundred eighty three)only i.e. the sum of insured value to the Complainant with Rs. 1,00,000/-(Rupees one lac)only towards mental agony and harassment along with pendent elite and future interest besides cost of litigation and other relief.<br /> <br /> In response to this, the Opposite Party No.1(one) has filed his version challenging the ownership of the alleged vehicle. The Opposite Party No.1(one) denied all other allegations in the complain petition and stated that he has not received the Repair Estimate and Claim Form from the Complainant to know the exact quantum of loss. Any how the Insurance Company has rendered proper service by deputing a surveyor to give his Motor Survey Report by conducting spot survey at the spot of accident. But without those documents the Opposite Party No.1(one) can not depute a final surveyor to assess the claim.<br /> <br /> In support of his case, the Opposite Party No.1(one) has filed the xerox copy of Insurance Policy, Claim Intimation letter Dt. 28/03/2008, Xerox copy of F.I.R., Xerox copy of motor accident survey report etc. <br /> <br /> The Opposite Party No.2(two) has set ex-pa rte in this case.<br /> <br /> After listening from the counsels & verification of documents it is found out that, the delay in settlement of claim is the only issue in this complaint petition. The Complainant alleges that, after completion of proper investigation and survey the claim is not settled by the Opposite Party No.1(one) is amounts to deficiency in service for which the Opposite Parties liable. On the other hand, the Opposite Party No. 1(one) states in his version and files written argument with affidavit in which the only ground for non-settlement of claim is the non-furnishing of required documents by the Complainant those are the claim from and the repair estimate etc.<br /> <br /> But the point of discussion arises here that, after proper intimation by the Complainant in regard to the accident and completion of proper spot survey, liability goes on the Opposite Party No.1(one) to take proper steps to settle the claim as early as possible. The Opposite Party No.1(one) has not filed any evidence in which he has asked the Complainant to file those documents for early settlement of claim. <br /> <br /> In view of the aforesaid circumstances, the Complainant is directed, to produce the necessary documents with the repair estimate of the alleged vehicle before the Opposite Party No.1(one) and the Opposite Party No.1(one) is directed, to settle the claim with in thirty days from the receipt of the repair estimate of the alleged vehicle.<br /> <br /> The Case is disposed of accordingly.<br /> No cost/compensation.<br />