Haryana

Karnal

CC/319/2023

Sahil Singla - Complainant(s)

Versus

The New India Assurance Company Limited - Opp.Party(s)

Raman Gupta

10 Sep 2024

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KARNAL.

 

                                                        Complaint No.319 of 2023

                                                        Date of instt.31.05.2023

                                                        Date of Decision: 10.09.2024

 

Sahil Singla aged about 28 years, son of Shri Rajeev Singla, resident of ward no.13, currently ward no.15 main bazaar, Gharaunda, District Karnal.

                                                                        …….Complainant.

                                              Versus

 

1. The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Claims Hub, through its Divisional Manager Karnal at Gagan Building first floor, near Old Bus Stand G.T. Road, Karnal.
2. The New India Assurance Co. Ltd.- Regional office, Chandigarh through its Regional Manager at Sector-17A, Chandigarh.

 

…..Opposite Parties.

 

Complaint under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

 

Before   Shri Jaswant Singh……President.     

              Ms. Neeru Agarwal…….Member

      Ms. Sarvjeet Kaur…..Member

 

Argued by:  Shri Raman Gupta, counsel for the complainant.

                    Shri G.S. Juneja, counsel for the OPs.

                   

                     (Jaswant Singh, President)

ORDER:   

                

                The complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the opposite parties (hereinafter referred to as ‘OPs’) on the averments that complainant is the registered owner of vehicle bearing registration No.HR-05-AN-5452, Nissan-Sunny and the same was got insured with the OPs, vide policy no.35390231210100004220, valid from 06.12.2021 to 05.12.2022 and the insured declared value (IDV) of the car was of Rs.3,50,000/-. On 04.12.2022 the complainant was going to his house from Karnal in the abovesaid car, which has been driven by him with all care, caution and by observing all of the traffic rules, at about 10.30 p.m. when the car reached at Namaste Chowk flyover, Karnal at N.H.-44, the car got dis-balanced by colliding with a stone, and as a result of this the car got flipped by colliding with the divider. Due to impact of this, the car got brutally damaged, ultimately it was a total loss. The complainant also got a minor injury in this accident, while he has been taken out from the car by the public. From the place of the accident, the car was brought up to the Bhatia Motors situated at sector-4, Karnal with the help of a crane bearing no.HR-69-B-2519 for which the complainant had paid a sum of Rs.1500/- to the crane owner. On 04.12.2022, the complainant got registered a DDR no.4 dated 04.12.2022 at Police Post at sector-4, Karnal. On 05.12.2022, the said Bhatia Motors had sent intimation to the OPs about the accident took place on 04.12.2022. The total estimate of the damaged car is about Rs.13,06,702/- as assessed by Bhatia Motors, as per the actual loss of the damage. In the month of December 2022, Mr. Anil Kumar Malik had arrived as surveyor and inspected the said accidental car and even the spot of the accident. He himself clicked the photos of the spot where the accident took place on the highway alongwith the complainant explaining him the exact spot in his phone. After that, on the repeated requests of the complainant nobody arrived till 06.02.2023.  Thereafter, Dalip Chhabra, Investigator, investigated the spot and in the meantime complainant sent the relevant documents to the OPs. On 16.03.2023, complainant had sent an acknowledgement letter to the OPs, providing all the information about the accident claim file alongwith the required documents by the OPs. After this entire scenario, nobody had arrived again to the complainant. Then complainant sent an email to all of the higher authorities i.e. Ramesh Mehar( Regional Manager), Rajiv Kohli (Managing Director), Kiran Jacob (Chief Regional Manager), Neerja Kapur (Chairman cum Managing Director) of the OPs on their registered email addresses as on dated 06.04.2023 and the same has not been replied by any of them. A reminder dated 07.04.2023 was also sent to all of them but they neither replied the same nor seen in this context. Then complainant sent a legal notice to OPs but it also did not yield any result. It is further averred that neither the claim of complainant has been settled nor declined/repudiated, till date and the same is totally null and void and not binding on the rights of the complainant. In this way there is deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs. Hence complainant filed the present complaint seeking direction to the OPs to pay Rs.3,50,000/- the IDV of the car alongwith  interest @ 18% per annum and to pay Rs.1,00,000/- as damages for the mental pain, agony and harassment and Rs.33000/- towards the litigation expenses.

2.             On notice, OPs appeared and filed its written version raising preliminary objections with regard to maintainability; jurisdiction; cause of action; locus standi and concealment of true and material facts. On merits, it is pleaded that alleged accident did not take place in any manner as being alleged. Claim intimation as envisaged under terms and conditions of alleged policy of insurance was not submitted. It is further pleaded that Shri Dharmender Kumar, Surveyor, vide his report dated 09.05.2023 has assessed the loss to the tune of Rs.2,97,000/- for net of salvage basis without RC and Shri Dalip Chhabra, Investigator has there was no accidental loss to the tail gate reported that as settlement of claim is on the basis of terms and conditions of policy of insurance and rules governing settlement of claim. Vehicle was got surveyed from Shri Dharmender Kumar, Surveyor and he had submitted his report dated 09.05.2023 and not by Anil Kumar Malik. Duly cancelled RC and letter from financer for cancellation of hypothecation, as envisaged under terms and conditions of policy of insurance was not submitted. Delay in settlement must be due to non-compliance of claim settlement formalities. There is no deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs. The other allegations made in the complaint have been denied and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

3.             Parties then led their respective evidence.

4.             Learned counsel for the complainant has tendered into evidence affidavit of complainant Ex.CW1/A, affidavit of Pardeep Goyal Advocate Ex.CW1/B, affidavit of Ankit Gupta Ex.CW1/C, affidavit of Vishal Goyal Ex.CW1/D, copy of insurance policy Ex.C1, copy of RC Ex.C2, copy of legal notices and postal receipts Ex.C3 to Ex.C6,  copy of claim discharge note Ex.C7, copy of claim intimation letter Ex.C8, copy of bill of crane Ex.C9, copy of DDR Ex.C10, copies of aadhar card and PAN card of complainant Ex.C11, copy of driving licence of complainant Ex.C12, copy of detail of fastag of vehicle Ex.C13, copy of transaction details of fastag of vehicle Ex.C14, copy of details of toll free crossing through fastag Ex.C15, details of fastag Gharaunda toll plaza Ex.C16, copy of intimation letter to Panipat D.O. Ex.C17, copy of letter dated 11.05.2023 Ex.C18, copy of estimate prepared by Bhatia Motors Ex.C19, copy of letter head of Bhatia Motors Ex.C20, photographs of damaged vehicle Ex.C21 to Ex.C27, postal receipts of intimation letter to Panipat D.O. Ex.C28, copies of emails sent to company, C.M. Window Ex.C29 to Ex.C38, screenshot of whatsapp chat to Dharmender Jain, Surveyor Ex.C39, screenshot of whatsapp chat to with Dalip Chhabra Investigator Ex.C40, intimation letter sent to insurance company dated 05.12.2022 Ex.C41, pen drive Ex.C42 and closed the evidence on 16.01.2024 by suffering separate statement.

5.             On the other hand, learned counsel for the OPs has tendered into evidence affidavit of Raj Kumar Mittal, Manager Ex.O1, affidavit of Dalip Kumar Chabra Investigator Ex.O2, affidavit of Dharmender Kumar, Surveyor Ex.O3, copy of insurance policy Ex.OP1, copy of claim intimation letter Ex.OP2, copy of survey report Ex.OP3, copy of investigation report Ex.OP4, copy of letter dated 19.06.2023 Ex.OP5 and closed the evidence on 22.07.2024 by suffering separate statement.

6.             We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the case file carefully and have also gone through the evidence led by the parties.

7.             Learned counsel for complainants, while reiterating the contents of the complaint, has vehemently argued that during the subsistence of insurance policy, the vehicle of the complainant met with an accident and was damaged totally. The matter was reported to the Police station. The loss intimation was also given to the OPs. Complainant lodged the claim with the OPs and submitted all the required documents and requested to settle his claim but OPs did not settle the claim. He further argued that now complainant has cleared all the loan amount and in this regard, financer i.e.Axis Bank has issued loan details and same was taken on record as Mark-A and lastly prayed for allowing the complaint.

8.             Per contra, learned counsel for the OP, while reiterating the contents of written version, has vehemently argued that on receipt of intimation, company appointed Shri Dharmender Kumar Surveyor to inspect the damaged vehicle, who inspected the vehicle and submitted his report and assessed the loss to the tune of Rs.2,97,000/- for net of salvage basis without RC. The claim of complainant has not been settled due to non-compliance of claim formalities on the part of the complainant and lastly prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

9.             We have duly considered the rival contentions of the parties.

10.           Admittedly, the vehicle in question met with an accident during the subsistence of the insurance policy. It is also admitted that the insured declared value of the vehicle was Rs.3,50,000/-.

11.           The claim of the complainant has been denied by the OPs on the ground that there was no accidental loss to the tail gate. The onus to prove its version was relied upon the OPs but OPs have miserably failed to prove the same by leading any cogent and convincing evidence. Moreover, OP vide letter dated 19.06.2023 has approved the claim of the complainant on the basis of net of salvage with RC cancellation and informed the complainant to submit No Objection Certificate from the financer, cancellation of Registration of the Vehicle, surrender of the original policy and submitted the cancelled cheque. When the OPs themselves approved the claim of the complainant and there is no occasion to deny the claim on the alleged ground that no accidental loss to the tail gate. Furthermore, complainant has tendered the affidavit of Pardeep Goyal Advocate Ex.CW1/B, affidavit of Ankit Gupta Ex.CW1/C and affidavit of Vishal Goyal Ex.CW1/D, who had witnessed the accident. Thus, it has been proved on record that accident took place as alleged by the complainant.

12.           The complainant has claimed the Insured Declared Value (IDV) of the vehicle in question i.e. Rs.3,50,000/- on the basis of estimate prepared by Bhatia Motors Ex.C19 to the tune of Rs.13,06,702/- but on the other hand, surveyor of the OP, vide his report Ex.OP3 dated 09.05.2023, has assessed the loss to the tune of Rs.2,97,000/-. Hence the surveyor report will prevail and the complainant is entitled for Rs.2,97,000/-. In this regard we are relying upon the judgment 2(2008) CPJ paged 182 (NC), United India Insurance Co. Vs. Maya, wherein it has been held that a surveyor report should not be dismissed summarily as the surveyor is independent and qualified person under the relevant provision of Insurance Act, 1938. In view of this authority as well as the facts and circumstances of the case, the OPs are liable to pay the loss assessed by the surveyor alongwith interest, compensation for mental agony and harassment and litigation expenses.

 13.          Further, Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court titled as New India Assurance Company Ltd. Versus Smt. Usha Yadav & others 2008 (3) RCR (Civil) 111, has held as under:-

“It seems that the Insurance Companies are only interested in earning the premiums which are rather too stiff now a days, but are not keen and are found to be evasive to discharge their liability. In large number of cases, the Insurance companies make the effected people to fight for getting their genuine claims. The Insurance Companies in such cases rely upon clauses of the agreements, which a person is generally made to sign on dotted lines at the time of obtaining policy. This is, thus pressed into service to either repudiate the claim or to reject the same. The Insurance Companies normally build their case on such clauses of the policy, but would adopt methods which would not be governed by the strict conditions contained in the policy”.

14.           Keeping in view the ratio of the law laid down in aforesaid judgment, facts and circumstances of the present complaint, the act of the OP amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.    

15.           Thus, in view of the above discussion, we allow the present complaint and direct the OPs to pay Rs.2,97,000/- (Rs. two lakhs ninety seven thousand only) as the loss assessed by the surveyor of the OPs alongwith interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the complaint i.e.31.05.2023 till its realization to the complainant. We further direct the OPs to pay Rs. 25,000/- to the complainant on account of mental agony and harassment suffered by him and Rs.11,000/- for the litigation expense. However, the complainant is also directed to complete all the formalities with regard to transfer/cancel of the RC of the vehicle in question and also submitted the NOC issued by the financer.  This order shall be complied within 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Dated: 10.09.2024                                                           

                                                                  President,

                                                     District Consumer Disputes

                                                     Redressal Commission, Karnal.

 

(Neeru Agarwal)         (Sarvjeet Kaur)

                 Member                    Member