CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM PALAKKAD
Dated this the 20th day of August 2014
PRESENT: SMT. SEENA. H, PRESIDENT
: SMT. SHINY. P.R, MEMBER
: SMT. SUMA. K.P, MEMBER Date of filing : 13/03/2014
CC / 37 / 2014
Thomas, S/o. Thankachan,
Residing at Valiyaparambil House,
Cherappadam, Thenkara P.O, : Complainant
Mannarkkad, Palakkad Dt. Pin-678 593
(By Adv. V.C.Janardhanan)
Vs
1. The General Manager,
M/s.Cholamandalam MS General Insurance Co. Ltd.,
2nd Floor, Dare House, 2 NSC Bose Road,
Chennai- 600 001.
(By Adv. P.Prasad)
2. The Manager,
M/s.Cholamandalam MS General Insurance Co. Ltd.,
Regional Office, 2nd Floor,
City Arcade Complex,
Guruvayoor Road, Thrissur. : Opposite parties
(By Adv. P.Prasad)
3. The Branch Manager,
M/s.IndusInd Bank, Palakkad Branch,
Chandranagar, Palakkad.
(By Adv. R.Manikandan)
O R D E R
BY SMT. SEENA.H, PRESIDENT
Complaint in brief:
Complainant purchased a brand new Ape Passenger Auto Rikshaw availing loan from 3rd opposite party. The vehicle had a valid insurance coverage from 07/05/2013 to 06/05/2014 issued by 1st and 2nd opposite parties. On 27/01/2014 the vehicle capsized, in front of Vaisagh Hospital, Mannarkkad and was substantially damaged. The front wind glass, indicator, head light, left mirror were broken and Rexin and battery were also damaged. Body of the vehicle and chasis also was damaged. Accident was reported to concerned Police Station and G.D entry was made on 3/02/2014. Complainant expended an amount of Rs.30,487/- for effecting repairs. Claim Form along with requisite documents were lodged through 3rd opposite party. 1st opposite party denied the major claim and sanctioned only Rs.8,000/-. Since the sanctioned amount was much lesser that what was actually spent, complainant has not received the amount. There is no reason for the denial of the claim. According to complainant, all opposite parties are jointly and severally liable to compensate the complainant. Hence the complaint. Complainant prays for a total amount of Rs.65,487/- from the opposite parties.
1st and 2nd opposite parties admits the policy and the happening of the accident within the period of coverage. According to 1st and 2nd opposite parties complainant has approached the Forum with unclean hands. The complainant is trying to get unlawful gain from opposite parties. The documents produced by the complainant shows that only the front glass, indicator, headlight, left side mirror and rexin is damaged. The model of the vehicle is 2012 and since the lifespan of the battery and warranty is over, complainant is trying to claim amount for the parts which was not damaged by producing fabricated bills. Whatever amount eligible was sanctioned by the opposite parties. Hence prays for dismissal of the complaint. According to 3rd opposite party, they are unnecessary party to the proceedings and there is no cause of action against 3rd opposite party.
The evidence adduced by the parties consists of their respective chief affidavits, Ext.A1 to Ext. A7 marked on the side of complainant, Ext.B1 and Ext.B2 marked on the side of 1st and 2nd opposite parties.
Now the Issues for consideration are
- Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties?
- If so, what is the relief and cost?
Issues 1 & 2
As per Ext.A6, the certificate issued by the Sub Inspector of Mannarkkad Police Station, the damage noted in the GD entry are the one with respect to front glass, indicator, headlight, left side mirror and Rexene. Damage with regard to the battery, body and chasis of the vehicle as alleged in the complaint do not find a place in Ext.A6. In Ext.B2 the surveyor has allotted Rs.600/- and Rs.250/- for repairing body and chasis. Battery defect is not seen recorded in Ext.B2 also. Bills issued for leveling chasis and body, for repairing rexin and purchase of new battery is disputed by the opposite parties. The bills marked as Ext.A1, Ext.A2 and Ext.A7 series does not reveal the fact that the amount mentioned therein was actually paid. As per Ext.B2 whatever amount eligible after depreciation is seen assessed. Opposite party submitted that an amount of Rs.8,297/- is credited to bank account of the complainant on 27/02/2014. Complainant has also stated in the complaint that when contacted opposite party has informed to withdraw the amount from the bank account.
There is no cogent evidence on record to brush aside the survey report. Complainant failed to prove a case in his favour.
In the result complaint dismissed.
Pronounced in the open court on this the 20th day of August 2014
Sd/-
Smt. Seena. H
President
Sd/-
Smt. Shiny. P.R
Member
Sd/-
Smt. Suma. K.P
Member
Exhibits marked on the side of complainant
Ext.A1 - Bills issued by the Mythri Auto Garage Rs.19,850/- dt. 21/02/2014.
Ext.A2 - Bills issued by Malabar Batteries Rs.5,500/- dt. 21/02/2014.
Ext.A3 - Credit Spare Bill No.1299 issued by the Akshaya Motors dt. 21/02/2014.
Ext.A4 - Receipt No.32916 issued by the Hospital Management Samithi, Mannarkkad.
Ext.A5 - Treatment/discharge Certificate dt.30/01/2014 (Original).
Ext.A6 - Certificate issued by the S.I. of Police, Mannarkkad Police Station Dt. 03/02/2014.
Ext.A7series - Bill No.1679 dt.21/02/2014 purchase of Rexin/ancillary items.
Exhibits marked on the side of opposite parties
Ext.B1 - Motor Policy Schedule Cum Certificate of Insurance..
Ext.B2 - Chola MS Motor final survey report – Private.
Witness examined on the side of complainant
Nil
Witness examined on the side of opposite parties
Nil
Cost allowed
Nil
