In the Court of the
Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Unit -I, Kolkata,
8B, Nelie Sengupta Sarani, 4th Floor, Kolkata-700087.
CDF/Unit-I/Case No.180/2011.
1) Manju Mitra,
17A, Lake View Road,
P.S. Lake, Kolkata-29
2) Debjani Roy Chowdhury,
9B, Avenue House, 107, Southern Avenue, P.S.Lake, Kolkata-29. ---------- Complainants
---Versus---
1) The National Insurance Co. Ltd.
Division No.10, Flat No.101-106,
N-1, BMC House, Connaught Place,
New Delhi – 110 001.
2) The Divisional Manager,
The National Insurance Co. Ltd.
Divisional Office-VI, 9, Shakespeare Sarani,
4th Floor, P.S. Shakespeare Sarani, Kolkata-71. ---------- Opposite Parties.
Present : Sri Sankar Nath Das, President.
Dr. Subir Kumar Chaudhuri, Member.
Order No. 21 Dated 24-10-2013.
We have gone through the pleadings of the parties, evidence and documents in particular and we find that complainants are the widow and only daughter respectively of the regd. owner of the vehicle bearing no.WB-02/Z-1781.
Smriti Kanta Mitra husband of Late O.p.1 during his life time insured his vehicle on line from the o.p. the National Insurance Co. Ltd., Division No.10, Flat No.101-106, N-1, BMC House, Connaught Place, New Delhi-110001 and having its regd. office at Kolkata at 3, Middleton Street, P.S. Shakespeare Sarani, Kolkata-71 and also having its dealing office at Divisional Office-VII, 9, Shakespeare Sarani, 4th Floor, P.S. Shakespeare Sarani, Kolkata-71, vide private car package policy No.60013274, valid from 6.1.09 to 5.1.10. The IDV of the said vehicle was Rs.1,81,566/-. The insured also paid compulsory premium of Rs.100/- for Personal Accident Coverage for owner cum driver to the tune of Rs.2 lakhs in case of death.
On 28.12.09 the insured Smriti Kanta Mitra was driving the insured vehicle bearing regn. no.WB-02/Z-1781 (Maruti Alto) towards Kolkata on Basanti Road with four of his family members and met with a road traffic accident in order to avoid a direct collision with a matador coming from the opposite direction under the jurisdiction of K.L.C. Police Station and as a result of which the insured vehicle was badly damaged and the owner cum driver, Smriti Kanta Mitra sustained fatal injuries along with other four occupations of the insured vehicle. On 30.12.09 the owner cum driver, Smriti Kanta Mitra died in RubyGeneralHospital. The FIR had been lodged at KLC P.S. by one Sri Uttam Kumar Dutta, son of Late Sailendranath Dutta of 61/B, Suren Sarkar Road, Kolkata-10 at KLC P.S. vide FIR No.137/2009 dt.30.12.09.
After the accident all the five occupants including the owner cum driver were admitted to Ruby General Hospital and during their admission in the said hospital on 30.12.09 one of their relatives who was not present in Kolkata lodged an FIR being no.137/2009 at KLC P.S. wrongly stating the fact there were six occupants in the car at the time of the accident instead of five occupants including driver, Smriti Kana Mitra.
Thereafter on 28.1.10 the widow of the insured, complainant no.1 submitted the claim form along with the required documents claiming for the repairing cost for the damage of the insured vehicle and also for the death cover of the owner cum driver, Smriti Kanta Mitra to the tune of Rs.1 lakh in the office of o.p. no.2 at Divisional Office-VII, 9, Shakespeare Sarani, 4th Floor, P.S. Shakespeare Sarani, Kolkata-71 but due to inadvertence in the claim form the name of the driver was wrongly mentioned Sampad Roy Chowdhury in place of Smriti Kanta Mitra. Subsequently, the said information had been corrected vide letter dt.3.9.10 and a fresh claim form was submitted to the insurance company according to their instructions.
After investigation, police had submitted the final report before the Ld. ACJM at Baruipur, South 24 Parganas vide C.S. No.71/2010 dt.20.5.10. after releasing the damaged vehicle from the police station the same was removed to the authorized service centre of Maruti cars at Auto HiTech for survey and repairing but after passing of about 7 months, according to the instructions given b y the o.p. no.2 vide their letter dt.25.8.10 the car had been removed from the said work shop to the house of the complainant no.1 without repairing done. It is pertinent to mention here that at the time of removing the car from the work shop the authority of the Auto HiTech informed the complainants that the repairing cost (estimate) of the damaged car would be around Rs.1,80,000/- but they did not provide any document to the complainants.
The insurance company in the mean time had appointed a surveyor to assess the damage of the vehicle but due to the long delay in settlement the insured vehicle has become a scrap and has no market value at all. O.p. no.2 did not handle the claims properly and finally repudiated the claims. Hence the case was filed by the complainant with the prayer contained in the petition of complaint.
O.ps. had entered their appearance in this case by filing w/v and denied all the material allegations labeled against them and prayed for dismissal of the case. Ld. lawyer of o.ps. in the course of argument submitted that the case has got no merit and the same is liable to be dismissed.
Decision with reasons:-
In view of the findings above and on perusal of the entire materials on record we find that o.ps. had sufficient deficiency in service on their part being service providers to their consumer / complainant and complainant is entitled to relief.
Hence, ordered,
That the case is allowed on contest with cost against the o.ps. O.ps. are jointly and/or severally directed to pay the insured value of the vehicle in question of Rs.1,81,566/- (Rupees one lakh eighty one thousand five hundred sixty six) only and are further directed to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand) only as compensation for harassment and mental agony and litigation cost of Rs.5000/- (Rupees five thousand) only within 45 days from the date of communication of this order, i.d. an interest @ 10% p.a. shall accrue over the entire sum due to the credit of the complainant till full realization.
