THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, AMRITSAR

Consumer Complaint No. 381 of 2014

Date of Institution : 18.7.2014

Date of Decision : 28.07.2015

Tushar Sachdeva, resident of 17, Amritsar Cantt, Amritsar

...Complainant

Vs.

The Oriental Insurance Co.Ltd., D.O.II, Madan Mohan Malviya Road, Amritsar through Divisional Manager/Principal Officer of the company

....Opp.party

Complaint under section 12/13 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986

Present : For the complainant : Sh. N.P.Sharma,Advocate

For the opposite party : Sh.Sandeep Khanna,Advocate

Quorum : Sh. Bhupinder Singh, President ,Ms. Kulwant Bajwa,Member &

Sh.Anoop Sharma,Member

Order dictated by :-

Bhupinder Singh, President

1 Present complaint has been filed by Tushar Sachdeva under the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act alleging therein that he got his car bearing registration

-2-

No. HR-51-T-7707 insured with the opposite party vide policy No.235301/31/2013/1232 valid from 25.5.2012 to 24.5.2013. According to the complainant the said car met with an accident on 24.10.2012. The complainant lodged claim with the opposite party and the opposite party appointed Mr.Sanjiv Khanna, surveyor and Loss Assessor to assess the loss, who assessed the loss to the tune of Rs. 1,37,416.15 paise. Complainant has alleged that the policy was Nil depreciation policy, as such the complainant is entitled to full amount of the loss as assessed by the surveyor. But the opposite party has paid only Rs. 75209/- to the complainant. The complainant approached the opposite party many times and requested them to make the payment of the full amount , but to no avail. Alleging the same to be deficiency in service, complaint was filed seeking directions to the opposite party to pay a sum of Rs. 62207/- alongwith interest @ 24% p.a.. Compensation of Rs. 50000/- alongwith litigation expenses were also demanded.

2. On notice, opposite party appeared and filed written version in which it was submitted that complainant has already received the payment of Rs. 75209/- as full and final payment pertaining to the damage to the vehicle in question. The complainant has settled the present claim with his own free will and consent and had duly received the payment of Rs. 75209/-. It was submitted that as per report of Subash Chawla, surveyor dated 26.6.2013 the payable liability of the opposite party was calculated as Rs. 75209/-. As such after obtaining the consent from the

-3-

complainant, the said amount was paid to the complainant. While denying and controverting other allegations, dismissal of complaint was prayed.

3. Complainant tendered into evidence his affidavit Ex.C-1 alongwith documents Ex.C-2 to Ex.C-13.

4. Opposite party tendered copy of policy schedule Ex.OP1 and OP2, copy of intimation letter Ex.OP3, copy of intimation letter Ex.OP4, copy of verification report of investigator Ex.OP5, affidavit of Sh.R.K.Sharma Ex.OP6.

5. We have carefully gone through the pleadings of the parties, arguments advanced by the ld.counsel for the parties and have appreciated the evidence produced on record by both the parties with the valuable assistance of the ld.counsel for the parties.

6. From the record i.e. pleadings of the parties and the evidence produced on record by both the parties , it is clear that complainant got his car Mercedes Benz bearing registration No. HR-51-T-7707 insured with the opposite party vide policy No.235301/31/2013/1232 Ex.C-2 for the period from 25.5.2012 to 24.5.2013. The policy was nil depreciation policy. The said car met with an accident on 24.10.2012. The matter was reported to the opposite party and the claim was lodged. The opposite party appointed Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Surveyor and Loss Assessor to assess the loss , who submitted its report Ex.C-3 and assessed the loss to the tune of Rs. 3,37,416.15 paise net payable to the complainant. The

-4-

complainant also produced on record the bills of repair Ex.C-5 and C-6. Opposite party vide their correspondence Ex.C-7 and Ex.C-8 have admitted that the policy issued to the complainant was Nil depreciation policy, but the opposite party did not settle the claim of the complainant. Ld.counsel for the complainant submitted that all this amounts to deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party.

7. Whereas the case of the opposite party is that the complainant has already received payment of Rs. 75209/- as full and final settlement pertaining to the damage to the vehicle in question in the aforesaid accident. The complainant has settled the claim with his own free will and consent and has received the payment of Rs. 75209/-. The opposite party submitted that surveyor Subash Chawla vide his report dated 26.6.2013 stated that the total liability of the opposite party is Rs. 75209/-, as such the claim of the complainant was settled at Rs. 75209/- which was duly received by the complainant. Therefore, there is no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party qua the complainant.

8. From the entire above discussion, it stands fully proved on record that complainant got his car Mercedes Benz bearing registration No. HR-51-T-7702 insured with the opposite party vide policy Ex.C-2 for the period from 25.5.2012 to 24.5.2013. It is the admitted case of both the parties that the policy was Nil depreciation policy. The said car met with an accident on 24.10.2012 and suffered loss. The matter was reported to the opposite party. The complainant lodged claim

-5-

with the opposite party. Opposite party appointed Mr. Sanjiv Khanna, surveyor and Loss Assessor, who submitted his report Ex.C-3 and assessed the net loss payable to the complainant to the tune of Rs. 1,37,416.15 paise. He has also issued claim cost approval sheet Ex.C-4 duly signed by the surveyor vide which he stated that this amount is payable to the complainant. Opposite party has submitted that as per report of one Subash Chawla , surveyor dated 26.6.2013 , the total liability of the opposite party was calculated as Rs. 75209/- and the said amount was paid to the complainant and the complainant has received the same with his own freewill and consent. But the opposite party neither produced any report of Subash Chawla, surveyor dated 26.6.2013 nor produced any consent letter or voucher signed by the complainant giving the consent of payment of Rs. 75209/- as full and final settlement of his claim. The entire story propounded by the opposite party is totally concocted one just to throw dust in the eyes of the complainant as well as this fora. It is the admitted case of the opposite party that the policy issued to the complainant is Nil depreciation policy as is evident from their correspondence Ex.C-7 and Ex.C-8. So the opposite party was bound to pay the amount of actual repair of the vehicle to the complainant and as assessed by the surveyor appointed by the opposite party vide his report Ex.C-3 and claim cost approval sheet Ex.C-4. The opposite party has paid only Rs. 75209/- to the complainant arbitrarily without any reason. Opposite party has intentionally with-hold any such report of surveyor

-6-

Subash Chawla dated 26.6.2013 nor the opposite party could produce any evidence regarding the deduction made by the opposite party in the claim of the complainant. Resultantly we hold that the complainant is entitled to full amount of Rs. 1,37,416.15 paise as assessed by the surveyor appointed by the opposite party vide his report Ex.C-3 and approval sheet Ex.C-4.

9. Resultantly we allow the complaint with cost and the opposite party is directed to pay the balance amount of Rs. 62,207.15 paise alongwith interest @ 9% p.a from the date of filing of the complaint till the payment is made to the complainant. Opposite party is also directed to pay litigation expenses Rs. 2000/- to the complainant. Copies of the order be furnished to the parties free of costs. File is ordered to be consigned to the record room. Case could not be disposed of within the stipulated period due to heavy pendency of the cases in this Forum.

28.7.2015 ( Bhupinder Singh )

President

( Kulwant Kaur Bajwa) (Anoop Sharma)

/R/ Member Member