Jharkhand

Bokaro

CC/18/23

Harendra Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Divisional Manager, The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Binod Kumar Singh

08 Apr 2023

ORDER

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bokaro

Date of Filing-21-02-2018

Date of final hearing-08-04-2023

 Date of Order-08-04-2023

Case No. 23/2018

Harendra Singh, S/o- Late Surendra Prasad Singh

 R/o- Abhimanyu Nagar, Chas, Distrcit- Bokaro

Vs.

The Divisional Manager, The New India Assurance Co. Ltd.

First Floor, Plot No. C-27, City Centre, Sector-4, Bokaro Steel City

 

 Present:-

                             Shri Jai Prakash Narayan Pandey, President

Shri Bhawani Prasad Lal Das, Member

                  Smt. Baby Kumari, Member

PER- J.P.N Pandey, President

-:Order:-

1. Complainant is absent and on the other hand Ld. Counsel for the O.P. is present. It reveals from the record that this case is pending at the stage of argument in which complainant is absent since long, therefore, in the given facts heard argument of the O.P. and as per provision of Section 38 (3) (c) Consumer Protection Act. 2019 case has been taken up for decision on merit on the basis of materials available on record.

 

2. Complainant has filed this case with prayer for direction to O.P. for payment of Rs. 9,70,346/- as compensation and to pay Rs. 50,000/-  as compensation for various type of harassment  and Rs. 10,000/- as litigation expense.

 

3. Complainant’s case in brief is that he is owner of Truck bearing registration no. NL-01-G-9423 financed by the SBI and insured with O.P. under policy No. 54040031150100001920 for the period from 31.07.2015 to 30.07.2016 meanwhile said truck met with an accident on 24.12.2015 at Dhup Guri, Jalpaiguri for which Dhup Guri P.S. Case NO. 01/2016 was registered and O.P. was immediately informed telephonically and on 29.12.2015 written information was given, thereafter, vehicle was shifted to authorized work shop for repair, which was surveyed by the surveyor. O.P. vide letter dt. 01.12.2016 demanded some papers which were already submitted earlier later on certain clarification was shot which was given. Further case is that in the month of December 2017 complainant was called in the office of the O.P. and directed to submit an application for settlement of claim on cash loss basis having no option and delaying attitude of the O.P. complainant submitted an application on 04.12.2017 then O.P. sent   Rs. 3,89,600/- in the account of the complainant as settlement in place of cost of repair of the vehicle  that also under duress. Further case is that in this way claim of the complainant regarding cost of the repair of vehicle has not been settled hence this case has been filed.
4.  As per O.P. matter has already been settled between the parties and complainant dully executed the settlement paper which has been admitted by him in the complaint petition itself. Further it is submitted that it is not the case that signatures of the complainant have been obtained by playing fraud or misrepresentation.
5. Ld. Counsel for the O.P. has placed reliance on the principles laid down by the Hon’ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission reported in (2011) 2 CPJ 246, ( 2010) 3 CPJ 100 and submits that law on this point is well settled hence case is liable to be dismissed.
6. Point for consideration is whether complainant is entitled to get relief as claimed ?
7. It is admitted fact that on account of same occurrence complainant has received Rs. 3,89,435/- from the O.P. after execution of settlement paper. It is not the case that signature of the complainant was obtained by the O.P. by playing fraud or misrepresentation rather as per complainant he settled the matter under duress. On this aspects there is no evidence on record.
8. In light of above discussion considering the facts admitted in respect to settlement and its implementation by the parties  and the law settled in above mentioned cases by the Hon’ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission we are of the view that complainant is not entitled to get relief as claimed, accordingly this case is dismissed and parties shall bear their own costs.    

 

J.P.N. Pandey)

                                                                                      President

 

 

(B.P.L Das)

   Sr. Member

                                                                            

                  

                                                                               (Baby Kumari)

                                                                                       Member