Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Rohtak.
Complaint No. : 433.
Instituted on : 19.08.2016.
Decided on : 14.03.2018.
Angrej Singh s/o Sh. Jaswant Singh R/o H.No.381, V.P.O. Baland, Tehsil & Distt. Rohtak.
………..Complainant.
Vs.
The IFFCO –TOKIO General Insurance Company Limited through its Sr. Divisional Manager/Incharge, IFFCO House, III Floor 34, Nehru Place, New Delhi-110019.(Insurer of Truck no.HR-55-F-6801).
……….Opposite party.
COMPLAINT U/S 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986.
BEFORE: SH.RAJBIR SINGH DAHIYA, PRESIDENT.
MS. KOMAL KHANNA, MEMBER.
SH. VED PAL, MEMBER.
Present: Sh.Anurag Malik, Advocate for the complainant.
Sh.R.K.Behl, Advocate for opposite parties.
ORDER
RAJBIR SINGH DAHIYA, PRESIDENT :
1. Brief facts of the complaint are that complainant is registered owner of Truck No.HR-55-F-6801 which was HPA with Shri Ram Transport Fin. Co. Ltd. That the alleged truck was insured with the opposite party and was stolen on 26.02.2014 during the insurance period and after searching his truck so many items were found missing from the truck. That complainant suffered a loss of Rs.248643/- and lodged the claim with the opposite party and also submitted all necessary documents but till date no claim has been released by the opposite parties. Hence the present complaint has been filed by the complainant with prayer to direct the opposite parties to make the payment of claim amount alongwith interest, compensation and litigation expenses.
2. On notice opposite party appeared and filed its written reply submitting therein that the complainant failed to complete the formalities and failed to provide the required documents despite their repeated requests and reminders. As such the claim was filed as no claim. Company is ready to pay Rs.86450/- after completing the necessary formalities. That there is no deficiency in service on the part of opposite party and dismissal of complaint has been sought.
3. Both the parties led evidence in support of their case.
4. Complainant in his evidence has tendered affidavit Ex.CW1/A, documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C13 and has closed his evidence. On the other hand, ld. counsel for the opposite parties has tendered affidavit Ex.RW1/A, Ex.RW2/A, documents Ex.R1 to Ex.R6 and closed his evidence.
5. Arguments heard and filed perused.
6. At the outset we are concur with the objections of the opposite parties that the complainant has not submitted the necessary documents with the opposite parties for decision of the claim as is mentioned in the written statement by the opposite parties and also contested by ld. counsel for the opposite parties at the time of arguments. We direct the complainant to submit the relevant documents as early as possible and further direct the opposite parties that after receiving the relevant documents from the complainant, they shall take an appropriate decision within 30 days from the receipt of documents. Complaint is disposed of accordingly with the observation that in case the complainant not satisfied with the decision of the opposite parties he shall be at liberty to file the fresh complaint. Original documents exhibits submitted by both the parties shall be returned to them and photocopy of the same be placed on record.
7. Copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced in open court:
14.03.2018.
................................................
Rajbir Singh Dahiya, President
..........................................
Komal Khanna, Member.
……………………………..
Ved Pal, Member