Punjab

Ludhiana

CC/15/289

Pardeep kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

UB.Ins. Ass. - Opp.Party(s)

Prince K.Aggarwal Adv.

22 Mar 2016

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, LUDHIANA.

 

Consumer Complaint No. 289 of 29.04.2015

Date of Decision            :   22.03.2016

                              

Pardeep Kumar son of Sh.Amar Chand, r/o H.No.263, Kucha No.5, Field Ganj, Ludhiana. 

….. Complainant

                                                         Versus

1.UB Insurance Associates (Apps Daily Claims Division), S-204 & 205, Suraj Plaza, 196/8, 25^th Cross 8^th Main, Jaya Nagar 3^rd Block, Banglore-560001, Karnatka, through its Director/Authorized Representative.

2.The New India Insurance Company Limited, Claim Hub-Banglore, 2-B, Unity Bldgs Annexe, P.Kalinga Road, Banglore-560027, through its Director/Manager/Authorized representative.

3.Fonez 4 U, Video Market, Ghumar Mandi, Opp. Khalsa College for Women, Ludhiana.

…Opposite parties

 

                             (Complaint U/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986)

 

QUORUM:

SH.G.K.DHIR, PRESIDENT

SH.SAT PAUL GARG, MEMBER

 

COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES:

For complainant                      :       Sh.Prince K.Aggarwal, Advocate

For OPs                         :        Ex-parte

 

PER G.K.DHIR, PRESIDENT

 

1.           Complaint under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986(hereinafter in short referred to as ‘Act’) filed by complainant Sh.Pardeep Kumar against Ops by claiming that he purchased mobile phone of make HTC, model Desire-816, Dual Sim, with IMEI No.352795063318934, second IMEI No.A1000037DB6E46 vide invoice No.6874 dated 29.10.2014 from OP3 for a consideration of Rs.22,500/- including VAT charges. That mobile phone was insured by OP1 and OP2 through OP3 vide invoice No.6875 dated 29.10.2014 vide policy No.670302/46/13/24/00000008,having validity of 12 months period commending from 29.10.2014 and ending on 28.10.2015. Theft of that insured mobile phone in the area of Ghumar Mandi, Ludhiana took place on 16.11.2014 and that is why, complaint with P.S.Division No.5, Ludhiana was lodged. Thereafter, complainant visited office of OP3 for giving intimation qua incident of theft. That intimation was also given on toll free number of OP1. Even intimation in writing was sent and relevant documents for considering the claim were submitted with OP1 through registered post dated 21.11.2014. No response was received from OP1 and OP2, despite lodging the claim and giving numerous calls and that is why, this complaint filed after serving legal notice dated 12.12.2015 with prayer that Ops be directed to pay the insurance amount of Rs.22,500/-  and   compensation  of  Rs.50,000/- along with costs of litigation.

2.                Notice of the complainant issued to OPs, but none appeared for OPs, despite service and as such, they were proceeded against ex-parte.

3.                Complainant in ex-parte evidence tendered his affidavit Ex. CA along with documents Ex. C1 and Ex.C9 and thereafter, his counsel closed the ex-parte evidence.

4.                Written arguments not submitted, but only oral arguments heard and records gone through carefully.

5.                Complainant sent legal notice Ex.C1 through postal receipt Ex.C2 to Ex.C4, but despite that the claim amount not disbursed and as such, complainant has cause of action to file the complaint, particularly when theft of the mobile phone in question took place on 16.11.2014. Ex.C5 is the letter sent by the OP1 to complainant on 16.3.2015. After going through the contents of this reply to legal notice, it is made out that the claim of the complainant was processed by the insurance company and they sought consent letter from the complainant               for finalizing the claim and releasing the payment. In view of the                   contents of Ex.C5, it is obvious that  actually claim of the insurance submitted      by the complainant still pending. Ex.C6 is the copy of invoice showing that mobile purchased through invoice Ex.C7 for Rs.22,500/- was insured. Ex.C8 is the copy of complaint lodged by the complainant with S.H.O., P.S.Division No.8, Ludhiana for showing that his mobile phone was stolen. Certificate issued by the service provider Ex.C8 and Ex.C9 also tendered in evidence. So from all this documentary evidence produce on record, it is made out that mobile phone purchased by the complainant from Op3 was insured with OP1 and OP2 and that is why the insurance cover issued by OP2. Copy of that insurance cover is available in the file. As OP1 and OP2 have sought consent letter from the complainant for finalizing his claim and as such, it is fit and appropriate to dispose of this complaint in terms that Ops be directed to consider the claim of the complainant within 3 months from the date of receipt of copy of the order, provided the complainant hands over the consent letter for finalizing the claim, within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of order to concerned OP.

6.                Therefore, as a sequel of the above discussion, complaint disposed of ex-parte in terms that OPs will consider the claim of complainant within three months from the date of receipt of copy of order, provided the complainant hands over the consent letter for finalizing the claim, within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of order to concerned Op. Copies of order be supplied to the parties free of costs as per rules. 

7.                File be indexed and consigned to record room.

 

                   (Sat Paul Garg)                            (G.K. Dhir)

            Member                                        President

Announced in Open Forum

Dated:22.03.2016

Gurpreet Sharma.