View 8978 Cases Against Bajaj Allianz
View 3981 Cases Against Bajaj Allianz General Insurance
View 45649 Cases Against General Insurance
View 17427 Cases Against Bajaj
Swapan Kumar Dangar filed a consumer case on 17 Aug 2023 against The Manager Bajaj Allianz general Insurance Co. Ltd. in the Bankura Consumer Court. The case no is CC/76/2017 and the judgment uploaded on 23 Aug 2023.
IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BANKURA
Consumer Complaint No. 76/2017
Date of Filing: 16/11/2017
Before:
1. Samiran Dutta Ld. President.
2. Rina Mukherjee Ld. Member.
3. Siddhartha Sankar Bhui Ld. Member.
For the Complainant: Ld. Advocate Ardhendu Sekhar Ghosh
For the O.P. : Ld. Advocate Chandi Charan Advaryyu
Complainant
Swapan Kumar Dangar, Vill & P.O.Chuamosina, Dist. Bankura- 722 157
Opposite Party
1.Manager, Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd., 3rd Floor, Block-3B Eco Space Plot No.11/F/11 Rajarhat Newtown, Kolkata- 700 160
2.Rudra Automobiles Pvt. Ltd., Vill & P.O.Kesiakole, Bankura
FINAL ORDER / JUDGEMENT
Order No.39
Dated:17-08-2023
Complainant files hazira through advocate.
O.P. No.1 also files hazira through advocate.
No step is taken by O.P. No.2
The case is fixed for Argument. After hearing Argument / written Argument from both sides the Commission proceeds to dispose of the case as hereunder: -
The Complainant’s case is that he took an Insurance Policy from O.P. No.1 bearing No.HBZ/11454853, valid from 10/06/2017 to 09/06/2018 in respect of his Vehicle bearing No. WB68TC 63/02. But on 01/07/2017 the said new Vehicle was damaged due to sudden dash on a wall and immediately the Complainant informed the incident to the O.P. / Insurance and got the damaged car repaired by O.P. No.2 at his own cost. Thereafter the Complainant submitted claim application for the repairing cost of the damaged Car for Rs.46,000/- to the O.P. Insurance Authority who did not pay the entire sum and hence this case.
O.P. No.1/Insurance Co. contested the case by filing a written version contending inter alia that the claim of the Complainant has already been disposed of by payment of Rs.24,924/- on proper assessment of the damage of the Car by the competent surveyor of the O.P. and as such the Complainant is not entitled to get any relief in this case.
Contd……p/2
Page: 2
-: Decision with reasons: -
Having regard to the facts of the case, contention and submission on both sides and the documents on record the Commission finds that the Complainant raised a repairing Bill of the damaged Car for Rs.46,000/- (Annexure-8) through O.P. No.2 Centre to O.P. No.1 Insurance Co. No explanation is forthcoming from the O.P. No.1 side as to why the entire bill amount of Rs.46,000/- is not admissible for reimbursement as per terms and conditions of the Policy. Though the O.P. No.1 has made part payment of Rs.24,924/- but they cannot avoid their liability to satisfy the reimbursement bill as claimed by the Complainant.
However, considering the nature and extent of damage and the attending facts and circumstances the Commission likes to fix the repairing cost of the damaged vehicle at Rs.35,000/- out of which Rs.24,924/- has already been paid and so O.P. No.1 is to pay the balance amount of Rs. 35,000/- - Rs.24,924/-) i.e. Rs.11,076/- to the Complainant.
The case accordingly succeeds in part.
Hence it is ordered……..
That the case is allowed on contest in part without cost.
O.P. No.1 is directed to pay to the Complainant Rs.11,000/- (round figure) within forty five days from this date in default law will take its own course.
Both parties be supplied copy of this Judgement free of cost.
____________________ _________________ _________________
HON’BLE PRESIDENT HON’BLE MEMBER HON’BLE MEMBER
Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes
Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.