BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL FORUM, JALANDHAR.

Complaint No.323 of 2014

Date of Instt. 15.09.2015

Date of Decision :13.05.2015

Bandna Arora Wd/o Late Sh.Vishal Arora R/o 24/45, Shankar Garden, Jalandhar.

..........Complainant

Versus

1. The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Regd.&Head Office Oriental House, A 25/27, Asaf Ali Road, New Delhi through its authorized representative/manager.

2. The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Branch Office, SCO-50, Puda Complex, opposite Tehsil Complex, Jalandhar through its authorized representative/manager.

.........Opposite parties

Complaint Under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.

Before: S. Jaspal Singh Bhatia (President)

Ms. Jyotsna Thatai (Member)

Sh.Parminder Sharma (Member)

Present: Sh.Gurcharan Singh Adv., counsel for complainant.

Sh.Brijesh Bakshi Adv., counsel for opposite parties.

Order

J.S.Bhatia (President)

1. The complainant has filed the present complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, against the opposite parties on the averments that the complainant is the widow of Vishal Arora son of N.D.Arora and is residing in the above said address. Vishal Arora, the husband of the complainant during his life time had got the insurance policy of his car Indigo CS make Tata, Model 2010 bearing registration No.PB-08-BN-0929 from the opposite parties. As per the instructions of the opposite parties, the husband of the complainant paid a sum of Rs.9992/- as premium to opposite parties for the insurance policy. The opposite parties after receiving the premium amount had issued the insurance policy No.233108/31/2013/ 4618 from 27.3.2013 to 26.3.2014 in respect of the above said vehicle. The above said vehicle of the husband of the complainant met with an accident on 3.7.2013 and unfortunately the husband of the complainant had died in that accident. One FIR No.222 regarding the accident of the said vehicle was registered at PS Shahabad. Thereafter, the complainant informed the opposite parties for the insurance claim of the above said vehicle and submitted all the requisite documents as demanded by the opposite parties for the settlement of the claim. The complainant approached the opposite parties for the settlement of the claim number of times but the opposite parties put off the matter with one pretext or other. The complainant sent a letter to the opposite parties for the settlement of the claim but the opposite parties did not reply the same. The complainant also served legal notice dated 27.8.2014 through her counsel upon the opposite parties but the opposite parties did not reply the same. On such like averments, the complainant has prayed for directing the opposite parties to pay her the claim amount of Rs.3,50,000/- alongwith interest. She has also claimed compensation and litigation expenses.

2. Upon notice, opposite parties appeared and filed a written reply, inter-alia, pleading that the captioned complaint is infructuous as the opposite parties have already approved the accident claim of the car No.PB-o8-BN-0929 insured vide policy No.233108/ 31/2013/4618 Cl.No.233108/31/2014/000235 subject to the policy terms and conditions and letter dated 10.10.2014 has been issued by the opposite parties in this regard and approval of Rs.2,79,000/- subject to the submission of the documents for payment i.e copy of NOC from bank regarding deletion of hypothecation from RC, attested copies of Ration Card, two photographs of the nominee, discharge voucher, attested copy of PAN. Thus the present complaint deserves to be dismissed on this short score alone. They denied other material averments of the complainant.

3. In support of her complaint, learned counsel for the complainant has tendered into evidence affidavit Ex.CA alongwith copies of documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C10 and closed evidence

4. On the other hand, learned counsel for opposite parties has tendered affidavit Ex.OA alongwith copies of documents Ex.O1 to Ex.O12 and evidence of opposite parties closed by order.

5. We have carefully gone through the record and also heard the learned counsels for the parties.

6. It is not disputed that Sh.Vishal Arora (since deceased) husband of the complainant had purchased an insurance policy Ex.C1 in respect of his car. It is also not disputed that the car met with an accident and an FIR dated 3.7.2013 Ex.C3 was lodged. It is stated that husband of the complainant died in that accident. The complainant lodged the claim with the opposite parties but the claim of the complainant was not decided by the opposite party insurance company till filing of the present complaint i.e 12.9.2014. Before filing of the complaint, the complainant sought information under the RTI Act from the opposite party insurance company and opposite party insurance company vide letter dated 28.5.2014 Ex.C7 intimated her that claim is under process and no time limit can be mentioned as it may differ from file to file. The complainant also served legal notice dated 27.8.2014 Ex.C8 but even then the claim was not decided till the filing of the present complaint on 12.9.2014. However, in preliminary objection No.2 of their written reply, the opposite parties have stated that they have already approved the accident claim of the car subject to the policy terms and conditions and letter dated 10.10.2014 has been issued by the opposite parties in this regard for approval of Rs.2,79,000/- subject to the submission of certain documents. So even letter dated 10.10.2014 was issued after filing of the present complaint. So, opposite party insurance company is guilty of delay in deciding the claim of the complainant for which the complainant is entitled to compensation. According to own version of the opposite parties they have already approved the claim of Rs.2,79,000/-. From the policy document Ex.C2 it is evident that car was hypothecated with State Bank of Patiala. So, firstly the State Bank of Patiala is entitled to receive the outstanding amount out of the approved claim amount.

7. In view of above discussion, the present complaint is accepted and the opposite party insurance company is directed to pay the admitted approved amount of Rs.2,79,000/- alongwith Rs.20,000/- in lump sum on account of compensation and litigation expenses. The complainant shall submits certificate from the above said bank regarding the outstanding amount from Vishal Arora(since deceased) and opposite party insurance company shall firstly pay the amount to the State Bank of Patiala with whom the car was hypothecated and balance, if any shall be paid to the complainant within one month after she furnish certificate of outstanding amount from the bank as aforesaid. In case the amount is not paid within the said period of one month then opposite party shall be liable to pay interest @ 9% per annum after expiry of said period of one month till the payment. Copies of the order be sent to the parties free of costs under rules. File be consigned to the record room.

Dated Parminder Sharma Jyotsna Thatai Jaspal Singh Bhatia

13.05.2015 Member Member President