BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPTUES REDRESSAL FORUM, KAITHAL.

Complaint no.105/13.

Date of instt.: 03.06.2013. 

                                                 Date of Decision: .2015.

Smt. Bimla Devi wife of Sh. Rajinder Kataria, resident of House No.764/11. Gandhi Nagar, Dhand Road, Kaithal.

                                                        ……….Complainant.      

                                        Versus

1. Branch Manager, Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., Branch Office, Pehowa Chowk, Kaithal.

2. The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., Oriental House, A-25/27, Asaf Ali Road, New Delhi-110002, through authorized signatory.

..……..Opposite Parties.

COMPLAINT UNDER SEC. 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 1986.

Before:           Sh. Jagmal Singh, President.

                        Sh. Rajbir Singh, Member.

     Smt. Harisha Mehta, Member.

Present :        Sh. Amit Chaudhary, Advocate for complainant.

Sh. Nikhil Gupta, Advocate for the opposite parties.

                       ORDER

(JAGMAL SINGH, PRESIDENT).

                       The complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986, with the averments that she is owner of vehicle No.HR-08L/7016 and purchased a policy No.261304/31/2013/1972 valid w.e.f. 15.10.2012 to 14.10.2013.  It is alleged that the said vehicle was standing in front of the office of complainant’s husband but due to public violence, the said car was damaged.  Information was given to Ops.  It is further alleged that the complainant lodged the claim with the Ops and submitted all the necessary documents including the repair bill amounting to Rs.57,120/- but the Ops repudiated the claim of complainant vide letter dt. 25.03.2013.  The said repudiation of claim is wrong and illegal.  This way, the Ops are deficient in service.  Hence, this complaint is filed.   

2.     Upon notice, the opposite parties appeared before this forum and filed written statement raising preliminary objections with regard to maintainability; cause of action; locus-standi; that the insured car was being used in unlawful activities at the time of alleged occurrence and got damaged himself by insured’s real son namely Gaurav, which is a clear cut violation of the terms and conditions of the insurance policy; that the complicated question of law and facts are involved in the present complaint and for adjudication of which, only the civil court is the best platform;   There is no deficiency in service on the part of answering Ops.  On merits, the contents of complaint are denied and so, prayed for dismissal of complaint.    

3.     In support of his case, the complainant tendered in evidence affidavit Ex.CW1/A and documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C7 and closed evidence on 09.03.2015.  On the other hand, the Ops tendered in evidence affidavit Ex.RW1/A and documents Ex.RA to Ex.RM and closed evidence on 17.03.2015.  

4.     We have heard ld. counsel for both the parties and perused the case file carefully and minutely and have also gone through the evidence led by the parties.  

A copy of this order be sent to both the parties free of costs.  File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced.

Dt. .2015.

                                                                (Jagmal Singh),

                                                                President.

                (Harisha Mehta),     (Rajbir Singh),       

                        Member.         Member.