Haryana

Rohtak

CC/20/209

Parveen - Complainant(s)

Versus

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Rinku Bhoria

17 Aug 2023

ORDER

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Rohtak.
Haryana.
 
Complaint Case No. CC/20/209
( Date of Filing : 25 Jun 2020 )
 
1. Parveen
S/o Suresh, R/o VPO Mungan, District Rohtak
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. United India Insurance Co. Ltd.
Divisional office: 2nd Floor, Jawahar Market, Delhi Road, Rohtak through its Divisional Manager
2. United India Insurance Co. Ltd.
Branch office:- 8/130, Dharampura, Delhi Rohtak Road, Bahadurgarh, District Jhajjar through its Branch Manager
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. Nagender Singh Kadian PRESIDENT
  Mrs. Tripti Pannu MEMBER
  Sh. Vijender Singh MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
 
Dated : 17 Aug 2023
Final Order / Judgement

Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rohtak.

                                                          Complaint No. : 209

                                                          Instituted on     : 25.06.2020

                                                          Decided on       : 17.08.2023

 

Parveen age 35 years  S/o Suresh R/o VPO Mungan District Rohtak.

 

                                                                              ………..Complainant.

                                       Vs.

 

  1. United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Divisional Office: 2nd Floor, Jawahar Market, New Delhi Road, Rohtak through its Divisional Manager.
  2. United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Branch Office: 8/130, Dharampura, Delhi Rohtak Road, Bahadurgarh, District Jhajjar through its Branch Manager.                                                                                                                                                                                                                            …….Opposite parties

 

COMPLAINT U/S 35 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,2019.

 

BEFORE:  SH.NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT.

                   DR. TRIPTI PANNU, MEMBER.

                   DR.VIJENDER SINGH, MEMBER.

                  

Present:       Sh. Rinku Bhoria, Advocate for complainant.

Sh.R.K.Bhardwaj, Advocate for the opposite parties.

                    

                                                ORDER

 

NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN PRESIDENT:

 

1.                Brief facts of the case as per complainant are that he got insured his car bearing registration no. HR-46D-5284, Model 2016, vide policy no.1112053117P10568268 for the period w.e.f. 17.07.2017 to 16.07.2018. The IDV of the car was Rs.4,70,000/-. It is further submitted that on 03.07.2018, he parked his car in Surajkund and properly locked the said car but when he reached on the spot after 1.30 hour, he did not find his car. FIR No. 438 dated 04.07.2018 under Section 379 IPC regarding the theft of the vehicle was registered by the complainant. The intimation regarding theft of the vehicle was immediately given to the opposite party. The complainant submitted all the required documents and furnished all necessary information to the opposite parties. But the opposite parties rejected the claim of the complainant vide the repudiation letter dated 02.12.2019 of opposite party. As such, there is deficiency on the part of the opposite party. Hence, the present complaint and it is prayed that opposite party may kindly be directed to pay Rs. 4,70,000/- alongwith interest @24% p.a. from the date of its due to its realization. It is further prayed that opposite party also be directed to pay Rs.1,00,000/- for harassment and Rs.21,000/- as litigation expenses to complainant as explained in relief clause.

2.                After registration of complaint, notices were issued to the opposite parties. Opposite parties in their reply has submitted that complainant did not provide any relevant documents as required by the opposite party to settle the claim. Repeated letters and reminders were sent to complainant by Reg. A.D. on 10.07.2019, 19.07.2019 and 05.08.2019 but he did not reply any letter and did not supply the relevant documents to the opposite party therefore the claim is not settled. It is further submitted that investigator of opposite parties also wrote many letters to the complainant to provide relevant documents but all in vain. It is wrong that the car was properly locked and after half an hour the car was stolen. The car was parked un-attended and the complainant was at fault. All the other contents of the complaint were stated to be wrong and denied and opposite party prayed for dismissal of complaint.

3.                Learned counsel for the complainant in his evidence has tendered affidavit Ex.CW1/A, documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C11 and has closed his evidence on dated 18.06.2021. Learned counsel for the opposite parties has tendered affidavits Ex.RW1/A and documents Ex.R1 to Ex.R5 and has closed his evidence on dated 19.04.2022.

4.                We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through material aspects of the case very carefully.

5.                We have minutely perused the documents placed on record by both the parties. As per respondents they have issued several letters to the complainant for submitting some required documents and clarifications vide letter dated 10.07.2019, 19.07.2019 and finally on 05.08.2019 but these letters have not been replied by the complainant and has not submitted any documents or clarification. The respondents have placed on record these documents as Ex.R3 to Ex.R5. No claim letter is placed on record as Ex.R2 dated 02.12.2019. On the other hand, the complainant has submitted that he had submitted all the required documents and clarifications with the insurance company on 14.08.2019 when they received the final reminder letter dated 05.08.2019. The complainant further submitted that an endorsement has been made by the respondent officials after receiving the required documents which is well proved through bare perusal of the documents Ex.R5, which has been placed on record by the respondent officials itself. We have minutely perused the documents and it reveals that these documents have been submitted by the complainant with the insurance company on 14.08.2019 but after that the insurance company repudiated the claim of the complainant vide letter dated 02.12.2019(Ex.R2). As such the act of opposite parties is illegal  and amounts to deficiency in service.  Hence the opposite parties are liable to pay the claim amount i.e. IDV of the vehicle to the complainant. At the time of arguments, ld. counsel for the complainant has placed on record the cancellation of HPA as ‘Annexure JN-A’, which is copy of letter regarding NOC. Meaning thereby the loan has been repaid by the complainant and the loan agreement has been terminated.

6.                In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, we hereby allow the complaint and direct the opposite parties to pay the claim amount of Rs.470000/-(Rupees four lac seventy thousand only) alongwith interest alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing the present  complaint i.e. 25.06.2020 till its realization and shall also pay a sum of Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand only) as compensation on account of deficiency in service and Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand only) as litigation expenses to the complainant. However, complainant is directed to complete the formalities i.e. to submit the signed form no.29-30, indemnity bond and subrogation letter in favour of the company within 15 days from today and is also directed to send a letter to the RTO for cancellation of R.C. Thereafter opposite party shall comply with the order dated 17.08.2023 of this Commission within one month.

7.                Copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced in open court:

17.08.2023.

                                                          ................................................

                                                          Nagender Singh Kadian, President

 

                                                         

                                                          ..........................................

                                                          Tripti Pannu, Member.

 

                                               

                                                                        .....................................................

                                                                        Vijender Singh, Member.

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Nagender Singh Kadian]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[ Mrs. Tripti Pannu]
MEMBER
 
 
[ Sh. Vijender Singh]
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.