Before the District Consumer Disputes RedressalCommission, Rohtak.
Complaint No. : 55.
Instituted on : 01.02.2019.
Decided on : 06.11.2023.
Rajbir s/o Sh. Ram Mehar R/o VPO MadinaTehsil Meham District Rohtak(Haryana).
..............Complainant.
Vs.
- United India Insurance Company Ltd. Registered & Head Office, 24, Whites Road, Chennai-CIN-U93090TN1938GO1000108.
- United India Insurance Company Ltd. Registered & Office D-Park, Rohtak.
……….Opposite parties.
COMPLAINT U/S 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 1986.
BEFORE: SH.NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT.
DR. TRIPTI PANNU, MEMBER.
DR. VIJENDER SINGH, MEMBER
Present: Sh.TejvirSaroha, Advocates for the complainant.
Sh.A.S.Malik, Advocate for the opposite parties.
ORDER
NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT:
1. Brief facts of the case as per complainant are that he is registered owner of a TVS-Jupiter bearing No.HR15C-3318 and the same was insured with opposite party vide policy no.22140031170160061674 for the period from 14.10.2017 to 13.10.2018. The aforesaid vehicle of the complainant met with an accident on 20.05.2018 andwasgot damaged badly. Complainant immediately informed the opposite parties about the accident and called them for settling the claim at respondent’s office. But till today respondents have not accepted the genuine claim of the complainant. After that on 04.06.2018 he get repaired his vehicle from Vidya Motor Gohana Road, Meham and paid Rs.10403/-. But despite repeated requests of the complainant, opposite parties have not settled the claim of the complainant. The act of opposite parties is illegal and amounts to deficiency in service. Hence this complaint and it is prayed that opposite parties may kindly be directed to pay the repairing expenses of Rs.10403/- and to pay Rs.50000/- on account of mental and physical harassment and Rs.5500/- as litigation expenses to the complainant.
2. After registration of complaint, notices were issued to the opposite parties. Opposite parties appeared and filed their reply. In preliminary objections of their reply it is submitted thatopposite party deputed Mr. Hitesh Danda, Surveyor to assess the loss of motorcycle no.HR-15C-3318. He assessed the net insurers liability as Rs.6908/- only. The payment could not be released as insured had not submitted the NEFT details(cancelled cheque). Opposite party sent emails/spoken to insured on 26.03.2019 and on 03.04.2019 to supply the NEFT details. But complainant instead of supplying the documents, has filed the present complaint. Hence the complaint is pre-mature and not maintainable. On merits, it is denied that complainant has spent Rs.10403/- on the repair of said motorcycle. The claim of insured motorcycle has been approved for Rs.6908/- as recommended by the independent surveyor. The opposite party informed the same to the complainant and requested on 26.03.2019 and 03.04.2019 to supply the copy of cancelled cheque if his name appears on the cheque leaf else provide copy of first page of his bank passbook for final payment. The claim has been settled as per terms and conditions of the policy and opposite party is ready to release the amount on submission of NEFT details of complainant’s bank account. There is no deficiency in service on the part of opposite party. Opposite party prayed for dismissal of complaint with costs.
3. Learned counsel for the complainant in his evidence has tendered affidavits Ex.CW1/A, documents Ex.CW1/2 to Ex.CW1/4 and has closed his evidence on dated 26.08.2022. Learned counsel for the opposite party has tendered affidavit Ex. RW1/A, documents Ex. R1 to Ex.R3and closed his evidence on dated 31.05.2023.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through material aspects of the case very carefully.
5. In the present case, the claim of the complainant has not been paid by the opposite parties on the ground that complainant has not submitted the NEFT details with the insurance company. In this regard it is observed that if the complainant has not submitted the account detail to the insurance company in that situation some other options were available with the insurance company. They can pay the claim amount through DD or through cheque. They did not opt any method of payment and has withheld the claim of the complainant. Hence there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties. In the present complaint, complainant has placed on record copy of bill Ex.CW1/2 amounting to Rs.10403/- but the surveyor has assessed the claim of Rs.6908/- only. Perusal of the policy shows that the policy is not zero dep. policy. So after deducting the depreciation value on the parts, the net amount comes to R.6908/-. Hence the opposite party is liable to pay the alleged amount to the complainant.
6. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case we hereby allow the complaint and direct the opposite parties to pay Rs.6908/-(Rupees six thousand nine hundred and eight only) alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing the present complaint i.e. 01.02.2019 till its realization and shall also pay Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand only) as compensation on account of deficiency in service as well as litigation expenses to the complainant within one month from the date of decision. However, complainant is directed to submit the cancelled cheque with the insurance company within 15 days and thereafter the opposite party shall pay the claim amount to the complainant.
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:
06.11.2023.
.....................................................
Nagender Singh Kadian, President
..........................................
TriptiPannu, Member.
……………………………….
Vijender Singh, Member
