Date of filing:-01/09/2020.                                                                                 Date of Order/Judgement:-14/11/2023.                                         

                                                  DISTRICT CONSUMER DIPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

B  A  R  G  A  R  H

CONSUMER COMPLAINT  NO. 72 OF  2020

Soraj at the rate of  Saroj Mallick, S/o. Dambaru Mallick, aged about    years, resident of village. Petupali, Po. Petupali, Ps. Melchhamunda, Dist. Bargarh.     

                                                                                                   Complainant.

-: V e r s u s :-

The Legal Manager, The Sriram General Insurance Company Ltd, At.Plot No.2863/3719, Geetanjali Complex, Lewis Road, Bhubaneswar 751002.

                                                                                                            Opposite Party.

Counsel for the Parties:-

For the Complainant :-       :- Sri D. Acharya , Advocate with Associates.

For the Opposite Party :-    :- Exparte.

                                                -: P  R  E  S  E  N  T :-

Smt. Jigeesha Mishra            .....       .....       .....       .....       .....       P r e s i d e n t.

Smt. Anju Agarwal             .....         .....       .....       .....       .....       M e m b e r (W).

Dt.14/11/2023.                                 -: J   U  D   G  E  M  E  N  T:-

Presented by Smt. Anju Agarwal,  Member (w) :-

1. The case of the Complainant is that the Complainant was having a Motorcycle bearing No. OD.17. L. 9965 (Passion Pro 13 S. Self.Drum. cast). On Dt. 21/10/2018, the owner of the Motorcycle died. The Motorcycle was insured with the Opposite Party under Comprehensive package Policy No. 331011/ 31/18/011568. The Complainant is the brother of the  deceased (Policy holder) and  he was shown as nominee for personal Accident Risk coverage of owner/driver. Soon, after accident report was made before Melchhamunda Police Station which was registered Ps. Case. No. 119 Dt. 20/10/2018 which corresponds to G.R. Case No. 451 of 2018 of the court of J.M.F.C, Sohela.  The deceased has insured his Motorcycle with the Opposite Party on payments of premium of Rs.50/-(Rupees fifty)only covering the risk of personal accidental claim of Rs. 1,00,000/-(Rupees one lakh)only. After death of the deceased the Complainant lodged claim before the Opposite Party but the Opposite Party neither settled the claim nor repudiate the same and kept silent.

Being aggrieved by the act of Opposite Party this Complaint was filed by the Complainant before this Commission.

2. The case of the Opposite Party is that the  Opposite Party did not appear before this Commission, Hence, set exparte.
3. After perusal of the documents filed by the parties following issues are framed:-

ISSUES

1.Whether the Complainant is a Consumer of the Opposite Party ?

2. Whether the Opposite Party is deficient in its service ?

3. What relief the Complainant is entitled for ?

Issue No.1.

            The Complainant deceased brother was the owner of a Motorcycle bearing No. OD.17.L.9965 (Passion Pro 13 S .self. drum. Last) and had premium of Rs.50/-(Rupees fifty)only to the Opposite Party for covering the risk of personal accident claim and in the said policy the Complainant  is the nominee.

            Accordingly as a beneficiary the Complainant is the Consumer of the Opposite Party.

Issue No.2.

            It is a fact that the Complainant vehicle bearing Regd. No. OD-17L.9965 was insured with the Opposite Party on payment of  premium fixed along with Rs.50/-(Rupees fifty)only for Add GR36A.PA for owner Driver, bearing policy No. 331011/31/18/011568. The period of insurance of the policy was from 16/02/2018 to 15/02/2019. On Dt. 20/10/2018 an accident took place when the Complainants  brother was riding the bicycle and the postmortem report reveals that the Complainants brother died on 21/10/2018.

            As the Complainant is the nominee for the aforesaid policy and in the said policy under the P.A. cover the policy was insured for Rs. 1,00,000/-(Rupees one lakh)only. After lodging claim the Opposite Party did not settle the claim.

            Hence, the Opposite Party is deficient in its serve by not setting the insurance  claim.

            Accordingly, the issue lies in favor of the Complainant.

Issue No.3.

            As discussed supra the Complainant is entitled for the relief claimed.

O R D E R

The Complaint is allowed exparte against the Opposite Party. The Opposite Party is directed to pay Rs. 1,00,000/-(Rupees one lakh)only towards insurance claim, Rs. 20,000/-(Rupees twenty thousand)only for mental harassment and Rs. 10,000/-(Rupees ten thousand)only towards litigation cost to the Complainant within one month of this  Order.

Failing which, the entire Order will carry 12% intrest P.A. till realization.

Order pronounced in open court on this 14^th day of  November  2023.

   Supply free copies to the parties.  

                                                                                              Typed to my dictation

                                                                                   and corrected by me.                                                                                           

I  agree,

( Smt. Jigeesha Mishra)                                                                    (Smt. Anju Agarwal)                                                             Dt.14/11/2023                                                                                            Dt.14/11/2023

 P r e s i d e n t                                                                                          M e m b e r (w)