Date of filing:-  31/05/2019.                                                                               Date of Order:-17/10/2023.

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL COMMISSION

B A R G A R H.

Consumer Complaint No. 39 of 2019.

Ranjit Singh Ahuja son of Surjit Singh Ahuja, aged about 45 years, Occupation. Transport Business, resident of Sareipai, Post/Ps. Sareipali, Dist. Mahasamund (C.G.).

                                                                                                                                        Complainant.

V e r s u s

The oriental Insurance Co. Ltd, represented through its Branch Manager, Bargarh Branch, Po/Ps/Dist. Bargarh.

                                 Opposite Party.                         

Counsel for the Parties:-

For the Complainant :-       :- Sri Jagannath Sarangi, Advocate and  Associates.

For the Opposite Party :-    :- Sri Pradeep Kumar Mahapatra with Associates.

                                                -: P  R  E  S  E  N  T :-

Smt. Jigeesha Mishra            .....       .....       .....       .....       .....       P r e s i d e n t.

Smt. Anju Agarwal             .....         .....       .....       .....       .....       M e m b e r (W).

Dt.17/10/2023.                                 -: J   U  D   G  E  M  E  N  T:-

Presented by Smt. Jigeesha Mishra, President :-

1. The case of the Complainant is that the Complainant is the registered owner of the motor vehicle Tata LP-709-TC bus bearing No. CG-06-B-1901, Chasis No. 386.512,GVZ.7, 29544, Engine No. 497TC89GVZ9052294. The vehicle was comprehensively insured with the Opposite Party vide policy No. 34560/31/2014/1814 covering for the period from dated 31/08/2013 to 30/08/2014. On 21/04/2014 the  vehicle met with an accident under patwa police station in the state of Chhattisgarh causing extensive damage and lost its road worthiness without taking for Complete repair. The fact of the accident was intimated to the Opposite Party. So also reported to the concerned police station. The Complainant lodged a claim with the Opposite Party which was numbered as 191100/31/20155/030037 dated 30/07/2014 . Wherein the Complainant submitted all the desired documents like copy of FIR, insurance policy, registration certificate, fitness certificate of the accident vehicle including the driving license of  the driver engaged for driving the vehicle at the time of accident with a request to process claim. The estimated cost of loss by the insured was Rs. 2,00,000/-(Rupees two lakh) only. But the surveyor estimated at Rs. 58,114/-(Rupees fifty eight thousand one hundred fourteen) only. There was no response from the side of the Opposite Party regarding settlement of the claim. The Complainant finding no alternative sought information through RTI application regarding the status of the claim to which the Opposite Party  remained silent except giving a reply suit to him. The RTI appeal was filed against non response/partly response of application for information. The Opposite Party replied to the RTI appeal and its status vide action dated 25/08/2016 which is completely vague ground and without any basis. As per the reply in the RTI appeal it was averred that the claim of the Complainant was closed in due process for non compliance of paper and documents within stipulated time which they have sought vide therein correspondence dated 12/01/2015, 10/02/2015 and 23/02/2016. The Opposite party reopened the case on approach of Complainant on resubmission of documents directly in the office. The claim is pending undisposed off till today which amounts to deficiency in service. Hence the Complainant filed this case before this Commission.
2. The case of the Opposite Party is that the Opposite Party filed its version and admitted that one package policy for passanger carrying commercial vehicle  bearing policy No. 345601/31/2014/1814 in respect of LP 709 Turbo Bus bearing regd. No. CG-06B-1901 was issued by the Opposite Party owned by the Complainant and the policy was valid from 31/08/2013 to 30/08/2014. The Opposite Party submitted that the surveyor assessed the loss at Rs. 58,114/-(Rupees fifty eight thousand one hundred fourteen)only in total  after deduction of policy excess of Rs. 1500/-(Rupees one thousand five hundred)only. In spite of the letter and remainders the Complainant did not comply with the requirements as has been requested by the Opposite Party which are highly necessary to dispose of the claim of the Complainant. Hence the Complainant is solely responsible for the delay in settlement. There is no any deficiency on the part of the Opposite Party and the Opposite Party. Prayed for dismissal of the case.
3. Perused the Complaint petition, version and documents filed by the parties and following issues are framed:-

1. Whether the Opposite Party is deficient in service.

2. What relief the Complainant is entitled to get ?

Issue No.1.

            The policy is admitted and the accident was occurred during the currency of the policy. The surveyor assessed the loss at Rs. Rs. 58,114/-(Rupees fifty eight thousand one hundred fourteen)only. The Opposite Party submitted that the Complainant is not a Consumer and there is no deficiency on the part of the Opposite Party. But the Opposite Party fails to prove that the Complainant has any other source of income. The vehicle was the only source of income of the Complainant which was used for his livelihood. Accordingly the Complainant is a Consumer. The Opposite Party has taken plea in order to avoid payment and submitted that non  settlement of claim was due to non compliance of requirements by the Complaiant. When the surveyor assessed the loss, it was the duty of the Opposite Party to settle the claim of the Complainant. But the Opposite Party fails to settle the claim. Non settlement of claim of the Complainant amounts to deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party. The issue is answered accordingly.

Issue No.2.

            For deficiency in service of the Opposite Party the Complainant is entitled to get relief. The issue is answered accordingly.

            As per supra discussion the following order is passed.

O R D E R

The Complaint is allowed  on contest against the Opposite Party. The Opposite Party is directed to pay Rs. Rs. 58,114/-(Rupees fifty eight thousand one hundred fourteen)only to the Complainant within one month from the date of tis order. Further the Opposite Party is directed to pay Rs. 30,000/-(Rupees thirty thousand)only compensation for harassment and mental agony and Rs. 10,000/-(Rupees ten thousand)only for litigation expenses to the Complainant.

Failing which the entire amount will carry 12% interest P.A. till realization.

 Order pronounced in open court on this 17^th day of  October 2023.

            Supply free copies to the parties.  

      Typed to my dictation

                                                                                              and corrected by me.                                                                                            

                   I  agree/-                                                                       

       ( Smt. Anju Agrawal )                                                                  ( Jigeesha Mishra )

              Dt.17/10/2023                                                                            Dt.17/10/2023

              M e m b e r  (w)                                                                        P r e s i d e n t.