Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/264/2016

Asha Kumari Jaswal - Complainant(s)

Versus

The General Manager, Syska Gadget Secure - Opp.Party(s)

10 Jul 2017

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-I,

U.T. CHANDIGARH

 

 

                               

Consumer Complaint No.	:	CC/264/2016
Date of Institution	:	20/04/2016
Date of Decision	:	10/07/2017

 

Asha Kumari Jaswal wife of Sh. Gurdial Singh Jaswal, resident of House No.110, Sector 21-A, Chandigarh.

…..Complainant

V E R S U S

1.     The General Manager, Syska Gadget Secure, 4^th Floor, Sapphire Plaza, PlotNo.80, S. No.232, New Air Port Rd. near Symbiosis College, Sakore Nagar, Viman Nagar, Pune, Maharashtra – 411014.

2.     Bombay Communications, through its authorised signatory, Booth No.34, Sector 35-C (inner market), Chandigarh

……Opposite Parties

CORAM :	MRS.SURJEET KAUR	PRESIDING MEMBER
	SURESH KUMAR SARDANA	MEMBER

                                                                       

 

ARGUED BY	:	Sh. Anchal Thakur, Counsel for complainant
	:	Sh. Nirmaljeet Singh Sidhu, Counsel for OP-1
	:	OP-2 ex-parte

 

Per Surjeet Kaur, Presiding Member

1.         The facts of the consumer complaint, in brief, are that the complainant bought a Samsung Galaxy Alpha Mobile Phone from OP-2 vide invoice dated 15.6.2015 for Rs.26,008/-.  The complainant was persuaded to purchase a Syska Gadget Secure Policy on the same day and she was given coupon code for the amount of Rs.1,900/- by assuring that her cell phone is protected from theft, physical/fluid damage, fire and allied perils, anti-virus protection.  On the night of 11/12.9.2015, the complainant had gone to attend a marriage function at AKM Resort, Zirakpur where, when she was talking with her relative, some unknown person stole her handbag carrying the mobile phone in question. The said incident was duly reported at the concerned police station and even the sim was also blocked. The complainant also lodged claim by calling at the toll free number within 48 hours.  However, vide letter dated 6.3.2016, OP-1 rejected the complainant’s claim on the ground that that there was no forceful/violent act. Alleging that the aforesaid act amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of OPs, the complainant has filed the instant complaint.
2.         OP-1 in its written reply has not disputed the factual matrix of the case.  It has been averred that the complainant had got the policy from OP-2 as per which any kind of damage due to negligence or intentional damage, the claim for the same would be rejected.  Pick pocket, negligence (for e.g. use in beaches/forget in auto rickshaw) not a forceful act, intentional act (e.g. thrown out in anger) cannot recollect, in case of theft only forceful act is covered, but, in the present case nothing had happened as such. Therefore, the claim was not covered under the policy’s terms and conditions and the same was rejected.  Pleading that there is no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on its part, OP-1 prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
3.         OP-2 did not appear despite due service, therefore, vide order dated 18.7.2016, it was proceeded ex-parte.
4.         Replication was filed by the complainant denying all the averments in the written reply of OP-1
5.         The contesting parties led evidence in support of their contentions. 
6.         We have gone through the record and heard the arguments addressed by the learned Counsel for the contesting parties.
7.         It is evident from Annexure C-1, coupled with the affidavit of the complainant, that she purchased one  Samsung Galaxy Alpha Mobile Phone from OP-2 vide invoice dated 15.6.2015 for Rs.26,008/- and a Syska Gadget Secure Policy after paying the amount of Rs.1,900/-for protection from theft, physical/fluid damage etc.  As per the case of the complainant, she lost her handset on the intervening of 11/12.9.2015 and, therefore, a DDR dated 12.9.2015 (Annexure C-3) was also lodged in the P.S. Zirakpur, but, OP-1 vide letter dated 6.3.2016 rejected the complainant’s claim.
8.         In the present complaint, the sole grouse of the complainant is that despite protection from theft, as per policy of OP-1, her genuine claim was refused for the reason that the theft, in the present case, was not a forceful act, therefore, the same is not covered under the policy in question.
9.         It is pertinent that OP-2 chose not to appear before this Forum and was proceeded exparte. Therefore, the evidence of the complainant qua it has gone unrebutted.
10.         After going through the evidence on record, it is crystal clear that as per page 19 of the terms and conditions of the policy (Annexure R-1) in case of total loss or theft, depreciation value will be deducted from the total invoice value of the handset and the remaining amount will be transferred to the customer’s account.  The handset and the policy in question were purchased on 15.6.2015 and the incident of theft occurred on 12.9.2015.  As such, the case of the complainant falls “Within 6 months of registration” i.e. 25% depreciation of invoice value.
11.         Hence, the complaint being genuine and as per terms and conditions of the policy of OP-1, deserves to succeed. Accordingly, the same is partly allowed.  OPs are directed as under:-

(i)     To disburse the claim amount after deducting 25% from the invoice value of Rs.26,008/-.

(ii)    To pay to the complainant Rs.7,000/- as compensation for mental agony, physical pain and inconvenience caused;

(iii)   To pay to the complainant Rs.5,000/- as costs of litigation. 

12.         This order be complied with by OPs within thirty days from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which, they shall make the payment of the amounts mentioned at Sr.No.(i) & (ii) above, with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of this order, till realization, apart from compliance of directions at Sr.No.(iii) above.
13.         The certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. The file be consigned.

 

	Sd/-	Sd/-
10/07/2017	[Suresh Kumar Sardana]	[Surjeet Kaur]
hg	Member	Presiding Member