West Bengal

Purba Midnapur

CC/52/2021

Abdul Odud Khan - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Divisional Manager (United India Insurance Company Limited) - Opp.Party(s)

Somnath Maity

20 Mar 2023

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
PURBA MEDINIPUR
ABASBARI, P.O. TAMLUK, DIST. PURBA MEDINIPUR,PIN. 721636
TELEFAX. 03228270317
 
Complaint Case No. CC/52/2021
( Date of Filing : 18 Mar 2021 )
 
1. Abdul Odud Khan
S/O.: Umar Ali Khan, Vill.: Sankarara, P.O.: Tamluk, P.S.: Tamluk, PIN.: 721636
Purba Medinipur
West Bengal
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. The Divisional Manager (United India Insurance Company Limited)
Haldia Division, P.O.: Khanjanchak, P.S.: Durgachak, PIN.: 721602
Purba Medinipur
West Bengal
2. The Branch Manager(United India Insurance Co. Ltd.)
Near Nimtalamore, P.S.: Tamluk, PIN.: 721636
Purba Medinipur
West Bengal
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. SRI ASISH DEB PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MR. SRI SAURAV CHANDRA MEMBER
 HON'BLE MRS. Kabita Goswami (Achariya) MEMBER
 
PRESENT:Somnath Maity, Advocate for the Complainant 1
 
Dated : 20 Mar 2023
Final Order / Judgement

Ld. Advocxate for the complainant is present. Judgement is ready and pronounced in open Commission.

BY - SRI. SAURAV CHANDRA, MEMBER

  1. Brief facts of the Complainant’s case are that the Opposite Partiesare theInsurance Companyfrom whom the Complainant purchased a Car Insurance PolicyNo.0317813120P104706075 during the period 08.08.2020 to 07.08.2021 against his Motor Car No.WB-30P8260, Engine No. K9K8796E044077 and Chassis No.MEEHSRAW5DA040107.

 

  1. On 04.12.2020 around 9:10 AM near Narghat during driving by the Complainant from Nandakumar to Contai, the said car was heavily damaged by sudden fire under the bonnet which was ultimately extinguished with the help of local people.

 

  1. On 06.12.2020 the Complainant made a General Diary No.217 to report the said incident before the Nandakumar Police Station.

 

  1. The incident was also reported to the Op No.2 on 04.12.2020 for claiming the damage of the said vehicle.

 

  1. Accordingly, the Ops appointed one Surveyor and Loss Assessor Sri. Soumen Kumar Maity, who opined and considered the present Salvage Value with R.C for maximum Rs.1,10,000.00 and without R.C Rs.50,000.00 respectively.

 

  1. Thereafter, the Ops appointed another Surveyor & Loss Assessor Sri. Alok Kumar Chandra who provided the Final Report on the basis of survey. The said Surveyor recommended the settlement of the claim on Net Salvage basis Rs.3,34,000.00 subject to cancellation of Insurance Policy and the salvage vehicle is to be kept by the insured for his own dealing and the Complainant was agreed on such instant dealing. Accordingly, the Petitioner has sold the salvaged vehicle on 15.12.2020 for Rs.90,000.00.

 

  1. On 03.03.2021, the Op No.1 issued a letter by mentioning that the Kolkata Regional Office of the Ops has accorded the claim approval for Rs.3,30,000.00 as Net Salvage without RC subject to compliance of Original RC Cancellation Certificate from the RTO which have to submit within 7 days, otherwise the claim will berepudiated.

 

  1. The Ops ultimately repudiated the settlement claim.

 

  1. The cause of action ofthis case arose on 03.03.2021 i.e. the date on which the claim was repudiated.

 

The Complainant, therefore, prays for:-

  1. To release the Net Salvage Claim of Rs.3,34,000.00 by the Ops with Interest @18% p.a.till release.
  2. To pay Compensation of Rs.1,00,000.00 towards negligence and grossdeficiency in service by the Ops.

 

  1. To pay a Litigation Cost of Rs.20,000.00 to the Complainant by the Ops for conducting the case.

 

  1. Any other reliefs.

 

  1. Notices were duly served upon the Ops but, Ops preferred to see that the case be decided ex-parte against them.

 

  1. Under the above circumstances, the Complainant has prayed for ex-parte order against the Ops.

 

  1. 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?

 

  1. 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.

 

  1. We have carefully perused the Petition of the Complainant alongwith all papers and other documents.

 

  1. 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 Ops, as such the case is maintainable in its present form and in law.

 

  1. In the instant case, the Complainant submitted Documents dated: 18.03.2021 containing the copy of Motor Preliminary Survey Report, Opinion for Salvage Value, Motor Survey Report (Final), Claim Intimation Letter to the Op No.2, General Diary to the Nandakumar Police Station, Aadhaar of the Complainant and Letter from the Op No.1 regarding Motor OD Claim.

 

  1. From the above submitted documents, it is carefully observed from the Letter of the Op No.1, the claim will be repudiated if the RC Cancellation Certificate has not received within 7 days. The Complainant neither producedthe copy of RC Cancellation Certificate nor the Claim Repudiation Letter issued by the Op No.1. Moreover,  this Commission has not found any Motor Claim Insurance Policy (existing or cancelled) in the record which is a primary documentfor assessment of the grievances in connection with this case. The copy of R.C which has been filed is not the copy of cancelled R.C in the name of Complainant which was duly checked with the Original by Sri. Alok Chandra, Surveyor & Loss Assessor of the Ops by putting his signature with stamp. Rather, it appears the vehicle was sold to one Md. Arshadby the Complainant on 15.12.2020 for Rs.90,000.00 as mentioned in the Paragraph No.7 of the Complaint. Even the Complainant has not made Mahindra & Mahindra Finance Service Ltd., under whom the vehicle was hypothecated as per Serial No.23 of the R.C in the name of the Complainant, as necessary Opposite Party in this case. Before selling the vehicle, consent of the Finance Company is essential with whom the vehicle is hypothecated, which is not available in this record.As the Complainant could not filed the R.C Cancellation Certificate there was no scope for the Op to satisfy the claim of the Complainant. The Complainant failed to comply the responsibility of submission of the Cancelled R.C before the Op as requisitioned vide Letter dated: 03.03.2021. Even in the Paragraph No.10 of the Complaint, the date on which the claim was repudiated is mentioned as 03.03.2021 but, this Commission has not found any documentary evidence of such Repudiation in respect of the said date. Resultantly, no cause of action arose as against the Op. The Complainant has failed to bring home the elements of deficiency in service against the Ops.

 

  1. Therefore, the Complainant is not at all entitled to any relief.

 

  1. Both the points are decided accordingly. Thus, the complaint case fails.

 

Hence, it is

          O R D E R E D

 

That the CC-52 of 2021be and the same is dismissed ex-parte against the Ops.

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.

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. SRI ASISH DEB]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[HON'BLE MR. SRI SAURAV CHANDRA]
MEMBER
 
 
[HON'BLE MRS. Kabita Goswami (Achariya)]
MEMBER
 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.