BY – SRI. SAURAV CHANDRA, MEMBER

1. Brief facts of the Complainant’s case are that the Opposite Party is Insurance Company from whom the Complainant purchased a Car Insurance Policy No.991391823110003789 with a Sum Assured of Rs.3,45,800.00 during the period 11.04.2018 to 10.04.2019 (Midnight) against his Motor Car No.WB-34BF8417, Engine No.B4AA400E189126 and Chessis No. MDHFBACD0J1817860.

2. The said car of the Complainant made an accident by the driver Sk. Manoar Hossen on 21.12.2018 at 3:30 PM in front of Gokul Factory under Police Station: Bhabanipur, Dist. Purba Medinipur.

3. For that reason the Complainant’s driver informed about the incident to the Op by phone from the said spot and subsequently lodged a complaint before the Bhabanipur Police Station on 15.01.2019 against which the Bhabanipur Police station initiated M.A Case No.3/2019.

4. The Complainant states, neither the Op appointed any Surveyor for inspection of the accidental car nor repudiates the claim/paid the insurance claim since December’ 2018.

5. The cause of action of this case arose on and from December’ 2018 when the Op not responded to the claim of the Complainant and remain totally silent on that issue.

The Complainant, therefore, prays for:-

1. To pay the Insurance claim of Rs.3,45,800.00 by the OP with Interest @10% p.a. from December’ 2018.

2. To pay Compensation of Rs.50,000.00 towards mental agony     and gross deficiency in service by the Op.

3. To pay a Litigation Cost of Rs.10,000.00 to the Complainant for conducting the case.

4. Any other reliefs.

6. Notice was duly served upon the Op but, Op has preferred to see that the case be decided ex-parte.

7. Points for determination are:

1. Is the case maintainable in its present form and in law?                
2. Is the Complainant entitled to the relief(s) as sought for?

8. Decision with reasons

1. Both the points I and II, being inter related to each other, are taken up together for discussion for sake of brevity and convenience.

2. We have carefully perused the Petition of the Complainant along with all documents.

9. Having regards had to the facts and circumstances of the case in the light of evidence, it is evident that there is no dispute that Complainant is a consumer having grievances against the OP insurance company, as such  the case is maintainable in its present form and in law.

10. In the instant case, the Complainant in addition  to his examination in chief has submitted documents viz,  copy of Car Insurance Policy, Certificate of Registration, Complaint Letter before the Bhabanipur Police Station and Register of Motor Vehicle Accidents in West Bengal Form No.43 issued by the Bhabanipur Police Station, Purba Medinipur. From the above  the Charge sheet (Report of the Investigation Officer)it  appears thatMVI Auto Mechanical Expert after physical examination  of the vehicle found- “from the point of technical view to the other than mechanical failure of the vehicle”. The Investigation Officer has submitted a prosecution u/s 184 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the offending driver.

11. It is also observed from the submitted Certificate of Registration as well as General Insurance Policy Certificate, the vehicle is registered in the name of a Concern/Firm i.e. M/s. Mamoni Hardwares. The complainant has not filed any document to show that he is the proprietor of the said M/s. Mamoni Hardwares for establishing his locus standi to initiate a claim as consumer. Secondly, complainant has not filed any document to show  that he lodged any insurance claim before the insurer/op. Had he filed any claim application the op would have got the opportunity of causing Surveyor investigation of the accident for ascertaining the justification of claim and for elements for settling the claim. It is stated by the complainant that he informed the matter over telephone, such a baseless statement has got no leg to stand upon. The op has not repudiated any claim of the complainant . So, it clear that complainant has got no cause of action to initiate the instant case before this commission.

12. This Commission has not found any element of negligence, unfair trade practice and or gross deficiency in service of the Op Therefore, the Complainant is not at all entitled to get any relief  as prayed for.

13. Both the points are decided accordingly.

Thus, the complaint case does not succeed.

Hence, it is

        O R D E R E D

That the CC-651 of 2019 be and the same is dismissed exparte.

Let a copy of this judgment be provided to the Complainant      free   of cost. The judgment be uploaded forthwith on the     website of the Commission for the perusal of the parties.

File be consigned to record section along with a copy of this      judgment.