West Bengal

Hooghly

CC/60/2019

Sri Sanju Santra - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Manager Bajaj Allianze - Opp.Party(s)

10 Jul 2020

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, HOOGHLY
CC OF 2013
PETITIONER
VERS
OPPO
 
Complaint Case No. CC/60/2019
( Date of Filing : 27 May 2019 )
 
1. Sri Sanju Santra
Chanditala, 712701
Hooghly
West Bengal
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. The Manager Bajaj Allianze
Mani Square, Kolkata, 700054
kolkata
West Bengal
2. Mr Sourav Pal
Insurance Advisor, Shyop 14, Chanditala,
Hooghly
West Bengal
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Shri Sankar Kr. Ghosh PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MRS. Smt. Devi Sengupta MEMBER
 HON'BLE MR. Sri Samaresh Kr. Mitra MEMBER
 
For the Complainant:
For the Opp. Party:
Dated : 10 Jul 2020
Final Order / Judgement

Order No.11 dated 10.7.2020 : Both sides files hazira by their respective advocates. Today is fixed for hearing the compromise petition filed by the complainant & opposite party dated 15.01.2020. The opposite party No.2 files written objection in respect of petition dated 15.01.2020, copy duly served. In his petition the complainant stated that the dispute has been settled in between opposite party No.1 and the complainant has no further grievance against the opposite party No.2 so he prayed to expunge the name of the opposite party No.2 from the complaint petition & this vide its order dated 12.2.2020 expunged the opposite party no.2. The opposite party no.2 by filing written objection assailed that the Motor car being model Name EON Magna +, Colour red passion, body type- Hatchback being Regn. No. 18S-0135 was purchased and opposite party No.2 only financed the vehicle and the said vehicle is hypothecated to opposite party No.2 with certain terms and condition of the hypothecation agreement made between the parties. So the opposite party No.2 is the owner of the said vehicle until or unless the entire loan has been repaid by the petitioner as per agreement. Thus if any settlement at all arose between the petitioner and the Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Ltd then the opposite party No.2 being the hypothecator will be entitled to the same. As such the opposite party No.2 prayed to dismiss the petition filed by the complainant and/or pass necessary order/orders directing the Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Ltd (opposite party No.1) to pay the insured amount directly to the opposite party No.2 bank.

Ld Advocate of the opposite party No.1 has no objection on that score. The Advocate of the complainant and the advocate of the opposite party No.1 assailed about the joint compromise petition dated 15.01.2020 in between the complainant and the opposite party No.1 in which both the parties agreed in the terms and conditions of compromise petition. The compromise petition on affidavit of both parties dated 15.01.2020 clearly speaks that the opposite party No.1 insurance company agreed to pay a sum of Rs.3,35,000/- as full and final settlement to the petitioner within 1 month from the date of order without paying further interest whatsoever and the petitioner has accepted the said proposal.  

Ld. Advocate on behalf of the opposite party No.1 files a letter dated 10.01.2020 of opposite party No.1 addressed to Hon’ble president CDRF, Hooghly in which opposite party No.1 authorized Ld. Advocate Arman Das to compromise the CC case No.60 of 2019 pending at Hooghly at Rs.3,35,000/- towards full and final satisfaction and no further interest /cost shall be payable on behalf of Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd. And also assured to make payment within one month from the date of receipt of order from the authorized advocate entrusted to settle / compromise the case amicably.

 Complainant files a Xerox copy of Aadhaar card being no.5192 1119 9245 as his identity proof.    

Heard the joint compromise petition dated 15.1.2020 filed by the complainant & Ld. Advocate of the opposite party No.1 and perused the case record it appears that the dispute in question has been settled in between complainant and the opposite party No.1 amicably and they filed the joint petition on that score. Upon hearing the parties as well as Ld. Advocates we are in the opinion that apparently there is no collusion or conspiracy or application of force or undue influence to come into settlement. So this Forum may not cause impediment at the pious act of the parties. The joint compromise petition dated 15.01.2020 has sufficient merit and it is deserved to be allowed.

 Hence ordered that the C.C. case 60 of 2019 be and the same is disposed of, on compromise. 

The opposite party No.1 is directed to pay a sum of Rs.3,35,000/- as agreed money as per compromise petition to this complainant within 45 days from the date of passing this order.

The opposite party No.2 &3 are exonerated from this proceeding.

The complainant is at liberty to file execution case for non compliance of this order after expiry of the stipulated period.

No other reliefs are awarded to the complainant for harassment and mental agony.

At the event of failure to comply with the order the Opposite Party  shall pay cost @ Rs.100/- for each day’s delay, if caused, on expiry of the aforesaid 45 days by depositing the accrued amount, if any, in the  Consumer legal Aid Account.

Let a plain copy of this Order be supplied free of cost to the parties/their Ld. Advocates/Agents on record by hand under proper acknowledgement/ sent by ordinary Post for information & necessary action.

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Shri Sankar Kr. Ghosh]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[HON'BLE MRS. Smt. Devi Sengupta]
MEMBER
 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Sri Samaresh Kr. Mitra]
MEMBER
 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

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.