SRI. SAJEESH.K.P    : MEMBER

    The complainant has  filed this complaint  under Sec.12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986,  seeking direction against the  OP to  pay Rs.41766/- towards the balance amount and also pay Rs.1,00,000/-  as compensation  for the mental stress.

Complaint in brief :-

   According to the complaint,  complainant is the R.C owner of the bus bearing Reg.No.KL-18F-4858 which was insured with OP with a valid policy, met with an accident by the  mistake of a car on 6/4/2019 resulted in injury of 10 persons and caused damage to the bus and it is taken to S.S.Auto garage and body works and a surveyor of OP inspected the bus to assess the cost of repair  etc.  According to the surveyor cost was assessed Rs.53,310/-.  But  the complainant spent Rs.71,509.55/- to get the bus repaired.  The OP paid Rs.4784/- towards the medical expense of injured person.  But, OP paid only Rs.29733/- towards the damage sstained.  The complainant apprehended that  OP and the surveyor is doing injustice to complainant by not paying the balance amount of Rs.41760/- and this act of OP leads to deficiency in service from the part of OP and hence this complaint.

       After filing the complaint, commission sent notice  to OP and the  OP  entered appearance before the commission and filed their version accordingly .

Version of  OP in brief:

    The OP denies all the averments except those  specifically  admitted .   The OP admits that the complainant has valid insurance policy and payment of Rs.29733/-.  The OP contended that complainant has already received the consideration  and under those circumstances the complainant is not entitled to get any further amount from OP.  The OP contended that the amount claimed by complainant is about the loss sustained by him due to the non-operation of bus service during the repair period.  The amount  quoted by surveyor is Rs.29733/- and the same was issued by OP and hence the complaint will not lie and liable  to be dismissed.

       Due to the rival contentions raised by the OP to the litigation, the commission decided to cast the issues  accordingly.

1. Whether there is any deficiency in service from the side of  OP?
2. Whether there is any  compensation  &  cost to the complainant?

       In order to answer the issues, the commission called evidence from both parties. The  complainant produced documents which is marked as Ext.A1(series) is the repair bills.   The complainant adduced evidence  through proof  affidavit and examined as PW1.  OP produced one document  marked as Ext.B1, is the surveyor report. No oral  evidence from the side of OP. OP filed argument note.

   On the perusal of documents produced by both parties, the commission answered the issues accordingly.  Ext.A1 (series), is the spare parts and labour charge bills produced by complainant to show that the expense which paid on behalf of the  accident happened to his bus.  As there is no dispute with regard to the policy, a detailed discussion on this point is not necessary.  As per the complaint, complainant alleged that he had paid hospital charges of  injured passengers  due to the accident.  But during the cross examination of PW1, he clearly deposed that only GD was entered and no injury was reported.  Moreover, he clearly admits that surveyor of OP assessed the damage after depreciation.  According to OP, the insurance will not cover the whole loss suffered and the complainant received the calculation amount of Rs.29733/-.  As per Ext.B1, is the  Motor survey report dtd 25/5/2019, the amount calculated  Rs.29733/- and the  amount was received by complainant.  Even though complainant disputed about the amount calculated  the surveyor of OP, he never appointed  a surveyor to  authenticates his claim of damages as per Ext.A1 series.  Therefore, the commission is in the view that complainant is entitled to get only the amount specified in Ext.B1 which was already remitted to OP and it was received by complainant.  Hence, the commission came into a conclusion that the complainant  is failed to prove the deficiency in service from the part of OP and thereby complainant is not entitled to get any compensation or cost as prayed in the complaint.

   In the result, the complaint is dismissed with no  cost or compensation.

Exts:

A1(series) spare parts and labour charge bills

B1- Motor Survey Report

PW1-M.P.Surendran-complainant.

 Sd/                                                                       Sd/                                                   Sd/

PRESIDENT                                             MEMBER                                               MEMBER

Ravi Susha                                              Molykutty Mathew                                    Sajeesh K.P

eva                                                                                   /Forwarded by Order/

                                                                                           ASSISTANT REGISTRAR