SUNIL KUMAR. filed a consumer case on 22 Nov 2022 against THE MANAGER,ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. in the Panchkula Consumer Court. The case no is CC/609/2019 and the judgment uploaded on 02 Dec 2022.
BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PANCHKULA
Consumer Complaint No | : | 609 of 2019 |
Date of Institution | : | 06.11.2019 |
Date of Decision | : | 22.11.2022 |
Sunil Kumar, aged 30 years son of Sh. Ramphal, r/o H.No.838, Sector-12, Panchkula, Haryana
….Complainant
Versus
1. The Manager, the Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Office Address Branch Office SCO-325, 2nd Floor, Sector-9, Panchkula.
2. The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. through its Managing Director, Regd. & Head Office A 25/27, Asif Ali Road, New Delhi.
3. Chief Regional Manager, Regional office, Address SCO-109-111, Surindera Building, Sector-17-D, Chandigarh.
4. Kanwaljeet Singh company agent of The Oriental Insurance Company Limited resident of Chandigarh, Sector-4, Parwanoo(HP).
….Opposite Parties
COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 35 OF THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 2019.
Before: Sh. Satpal, President.
Dr. Pawan Kumar Saini, Member
Dr. Sushma Garg, Member
For the Parties: Sh.Shashi Kant Chohan, Advocate for the complainant.
Sh.Ashish Naik, Advocate for OPs No.1 to 3.
OP No.4 already given up vide order dated 12.11.2020.
ORDER
(Satpal, President)
1. The brief facts of the present complaint are that the complainant had got his car insured bearing registration no.HR-26-CH- 6132 from OP NO.4 vide Insurance policy no.131300/31/2019/21094 dated 29.06.2018 and paid the requisite premium of Rs.9562/- against the assessed value of car i.e. Rs.3,00,000/-. At the time of purchase of above policy, the OP No.4 revealed the merits of Bumper to Bumper policy as it covers for all fiber, rubber and metal parts of the vehicle without any deduction of depreciation and further told the complainant that this policy is also known as Zero Depreciation and on his advice and assurance the complainant purchased the above policy. On 21.10.2018 car of complainant, Sunil Kumar, driven by Vineet Dhanda met with an accident at Patiala road Zirakpur. Immediately complainant informed the office of Ops about the said accident and thereafter, the vehicle was towed with another vehicle and dropped the same at the workshop of the authorized dealer of Chevrolet which is situated in Industrial Area Chandigarh. Thereafter the above said dealer referred complainant’s car to Ambala Automobile India Ltd. Village Barnala, Naraingarh road, Ambala City, Haryana for repairing the car. The car in question was duly insured when it met with an accident on 21.10.2018 and the policy was in operation upto 28.06.2019(mid-night). The complainant’s car was duly repaired by the authorized agency and the agency charged an amount of Rs.1,35,000/- for repairing the above said vehicle and the complainant paid the said amount to the Ambala Automobiles India Ltd. as the said agency refused to accept the insurance policy issued by Ops to him which is cash-less policy and asked that he can himself claim the amount from the insurance company. On the request of the complainant, the said agency applied for the claim against the above mentioned policy and after passage of long time, the OP-company accepted the claim of the complainant but they did not make the full payment i.e. Rs.1,35,000/- which complainant was forced to pay in cash for the repair of his vehicle inspite of the fact that the insurance policy issued by Ops is a cashless policy. The complainant paid an amount of Rs.1,20,000/- though bank account of the complainant against the claim of an amount of Rs.1,35,000/-. As per terms and conditions of the policy, they are liable to make full payment of the bill amount. The complainant requested to Ops many times to accept the genuine claim/request of the complainant but the Ops did not pay any heed to the genuine request of the complainant. The complainant has served a legal notice upon the Ops through his counsel on 26.08.2019 but all in vain. Due to the act and conduct of Ops No.1 to 4, the complainant has suffered a great deal of financial loss, mental agony and harassment; hence, the present complaint.
2. Upon notice OPs No.1 to 3 appeared through counsel and filed written statement raising preliminary objections qua complaint is not maintainable being false and frivolous; the complaint is bad for non-joinder of the necessary parties; no jurisdiction; no cause of action and the complainant has not come with clean hands. It is stated that the vehicle in question was got repaired by the Ambala Autombiles India Ltd. Naraingarh Road, Ambala City. Further, the complainant is required to submit strict proof of averments made by him. However, it is submitted that it was duty of the complainant to enquire if the said repairing agency is accepting the vehicle being covered under the cashless policy or not. It is submitted that Ops has rightly released the claim amount of Rs.1,20,000/- against the excessively claimed amount of Rs.1,35,000/- to the complainant as per terms and conditions of the policy as well as surveyor report. The complainant has received the claim amount as per terms and conditions of the policy and is not entitled to any other amount as he claimed for. So, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the OPs No. 1 to 3 and prayed for dismissal of the present complaint.
3. The learned counsel for the complainant has tendered affidavit as Annexure C-A along with documents Annexure C-1 to C-3 in evidence and closed the evidence by making a separate statement. On the other hand, the ld. counsel for the OPs No.1 to 3 has tendered affidavit as Annexure R-1A and closed the evidence. The OP No.4 is already given up vide order dated 12.11.2020.
4. We have heard the learned counsels for the parties and gone through the entire record available on file including the written arguments filed by the learned counsels for complainant as well as OPs No.1 to 3, minutely and carefully.
5. Undisputedly, the car bearing no.HR-26-CH-6132 met with an accident on 21.10.2018 during the subsistence of the insurance policy (Annexure C-1) issued by Oriental Insurance Company i.e. Ops, effective from 29.06.2018 to midnight of 28.06.2019. The expenses incurred on the repair of the said accidental car amounting to Rs.1,35,004.00 is not in dispute. Further, the payment of Rs.1,35,004/- to Ambala Auto Mobile India Pvt. Ltd. Village Barnala, Naraingarh Road, Ambala City, Haryana by the complainant against the repair bill no.1494 vide receipt voucher Mark ‘A’, ‘B’, ‘C’ is also not in dispute.
6. The only grievance of the complainant against OPs No.1 to 3 is that he has been reimbursed only a sum of Rs. 1,20,000/- whereas he had paid a sum of Rs.1,35,004/-as repair charges. The learned counsel for the complainant during arguments reiterating the averments made in the complaint contended that the vehicle in question was insured with OPs vide insurance policy(Annexure C-1) on zero depreciation basis. It is contended that the OPs were not justified in making any kind of deprecation out of the repair charges as premium amounting to Rs. 1,595/- was paid for availing the facility of nil depreciation. It is also contended that Ops have not clarified as to how and under what head, the depreciation has been made and thus, it is prayed that the complaint may be allowed by granting the relief as claimed for in the complaint.
7. The Ops have resisted the complaint by raising the preliminary objections as well as on merits in written statement. As per preliminary objections, it is submitted that the complainant has not approached with clean hands.
This objection is rejected for want of clarification as to what relevant facts have been concealed by the complainant.
The next objection is that the complaint is bad for non-joinder of the necessary parties. In this regard, the learned counsel for the Ops contended that Ambala Auto Mobile India Pvt. Ltd. Village Barnala, Naraingarh Road, Ambala City, Haryana was a necessary party, which has not been impleaded in the present complaint.
This objection deserves out-right dismissal because the repair bill issued by the said Ambala Auto Mobile India Pvt. Ltd. Village Barnala, Naraingarh Road, Ambala City, Haryana is placed on record as Annexure C-2. As per the said repair bill, the Ambala Auto Mobile India Pvt. Ltd. Village Barnala, Naraingarh Road, Ambala City, Haryana is an authorized dealer of Chevrolet Sales India Pvt. Ltd. which has issued the bill no.001JTI/18001494 against which payment of Rs.1,35,004/- has been made by the complainant on 19.12.2018 vide voucher Mark ‘A’, ‘B’ & ‘C’. Moreover, a sum of Rs. 1,20,000/- has already been released by the Ops No.1 to 3 against the said bill(Annexure C-2). Therefore, the impleadment of Ambala Auto Mobile India Pvt. Ltd. Village Barnala, Naraingarh Road, Ambala City, Haryana was neither proper nor necessary to sort out the controversy in the present complaint, so this objection is rejected being baseless and meritless.
The next objection is that the Consumer Commission has no jurisdiction to entertain and try the present complaint. This objection is also rejected in view of the fact that office of OP No.1 is within the jurisdiction of this Commission. Moreover, the complainant is resident of H.No.838, Sector-12, Panchkula, wherein the policy was received. This objection, thus carry no merits and substance.
8. On merits, the only submission made on behalf of the OPs is that Ops have rightly released the amount of Rs.1,20,000/- against the excessively claimed amount of Rs.1,35,004 to the complainant as per terms and condition of the insurance policy.
The learned counsel on behalf of the Ops vehemently contended that no amount above the already paid amount of Rs. 1,20,000/- is payable to the complainant as per terms and conditions of the policy. It is contended that the said amount has been released on the basis of surveyor report and thus, there is no merits in the present complaint.
9. After hearing the learned counsel for both the parties and perusing the relevant record, it is found that vehicle in question was insured on zero depreciation basis vide(Annexure C-1) on the basis of payment of additional premium of Rs.1,595/-by the complainant to the OPs, therefore, no deduction was liable to be made except a compulsory deduction of Rs.1,000/-. No such terms and conditions on the basis of which, deduction of Rs.15,000/- was made out of bill amounting to Rs.1,35,004/- is placed on record. Even, the report of surveyor on the basis of which a sum of Rs.1,20,000/- has been placed on record. The repair bill issued by Ambala Auto Mobile India Pvt. Ltd. Village Barnala, Naraingarh Road, Ambala City, Haryana, which is the authorized dealer of the Chevrolet Sales India Pvt. Ltd. is of Rs.1,35,000/-, wherein details of 47 parts of the body with their rate has been mentioned. In the absence of terms and conditions of the policy as also the surveyor report of which the Ops have taken shelter, while releasing the amount of Rs.1,20,000/- against the repair bill amounting to Rs.1,35,004.00. In our considered opinion, the Ops were not justified to make the deductions of Rs.15,000/-when vehicle was insured with an additional premium under the zero depreciation policy. Therefore, we conclude that there have lapses and deficiencies on the part of the Ops while rendering services to the complainant.
10. Coming to relief, it is found that the complainant has claimed indemnification of total loss of the car by repairing the vehicle with new one. This prayer is declined as it is not a case of total loss of the vehicle. However, the complainant was entitled to the payment of Rs.1,35,004/- after making a deduction of Rs.1,000/- as compulsory deductible as per terms and conditions of the policy but he was paid a sum of Rs.1,20,000/-. Thus, the complainant is entitled to the balance payment of Rs.14,004/- from OPs alongwith interest. The complainant is also entitled to adequate compensation on account of mental agony, harassment and litigation charges.
11. As a sequel to the above discussion, we partly allow the present complaint with the following directions:-
12. The OPs No.1 to 3 shall comply with the order within a period of 45 days from the date of communication of copy of this order failing which the complainant shall be at liberty to approach this Commission for initiation of proceedings under Section 71/72 of CP Act, against the OPs No.1 to 3. A copy of this order shall be forwarded, free of cost, to the parties to the complaint and file be consigned to record room after due compliance.
Announced on:22.11.2022
Dr.Sushma Garg Dr. Pawan Kumar Saini Satpal
Member Member President
Note: Each and every page of this order has been duly signed by me.
Satpal,
President
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.