BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SIRSA.

Complaint No.216/2018.

Date of instt.:28.08.2018. 

                                                                     Date of Decision: 30.04.2019.

Inderjeet Dhingra aged about 65 years son of Sh.Mulkh Raj Dhingra resident of Bhagat Singh Colony, Barnala Road, Sirsa Tehsil & District Sirsa.

                                                                            ……….Complainant.

                                                Versus

United India Insurance Company Limited near Ridhi Sidhi Lab, Dabwali Road, Sirsa Tehsil & District Sirsa through General Manager (O.P.)

..……..Opposite Party.

COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION  ACT, 1986.

Before:      SH.R.L.AHUJA…………………………PRESIDENT                               SH.ISSAM SINGH SAGWAL …… MEMBER                                                  MRS.SUKHDEEP KAUR………MEMBER.

Present:      Shri R.K.Garg, Adv. for the complainant.

                   Shri Kapil Sharma, Adv. for the OP.

ORDER

                   The complainant has filed this complaint with the averments that he got his vehicle Chevrolet Beat car model 2012 bearing No.HR24Q-6205 insured with Op with IDV Rs.2 lac. His vehicle had met with an accident and as per bills of repair, he had spent Rs.170840/.- but the OP had only paid Rs.54,744/-, which were received by him under protest, after deducting 40 % on iron articles and 50 % on rubber articles.  The labour charges were Rs.39,200/- but the OP had only paid Rs.26,200/-. The Op illegally and wrongly made deductions on the amount of the bill and only paid meager amount. Due to the act and conduct of the Op, the complainant has suffered mental agony and harassment which is clearly cut deficiency in service on its part. Hence, this complaint.

2.       On notice, Op appeared and filed its reply, wherein it has been submitted that on receiving of intimation qua accidental loss of vehicle car bearing No.HR24-Q/6205, surveyor and loss assessor was appointed, who after survey, had submitted his final report, wherein he had assessed the loss of the car to the tune of Rs.54,744/-, which was paid to the complainant upto the satisfaction of the complainant.  It has been further submitted that the depreciation was deducted as per terms and conditions of the policy and the insurance company was liable for the labour work for the accidental portion only and the insurance was not liable for the extra work conducted by the insured .  The claim was paid to the complainant as per the recommendation and assessment of the surveyor, therefore, there is no deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OP. Other contentions have been controverted and prayer for dismissal of the complaint has been made.

3.       Thereafter, both the parties have led their respective evidence.

4.       We have heard ld. counsel for both the parties and perused the case file carefully.

5.   The complainant, in order to prove his case has filed his affidavit Ex.CW1/A, in which he has reiterated all the averments made in the complaint and has tendered documents such as assessment sheet summary Ex.C1, Assessment sheet details, Ex.C2, surveyor report Ex.C3, bill for labour charges Ex.C4, bill issued New Sirsa Crane Service Ex.C5 and bill for disposal spare parts Ex.C6. On the other hand, the Op has tendered affidavit of Sh.Surender Kumar, Assistant Manager as Ex.R1, in which he has deposed in terms of reply and also tendered documents such as insurance policy Ex.R2, motor survey final report Ex.R3, another motor (spot/final) survey report Ex.R4, motor claim intimation letter Ex.R5, bill of spare part Ex.R6, bill for labour work Ex.R7, another bills Ex.R8 to Ex.R13, motor claim form Ex.R14, motor claim intimation letter Ex.R15 and claim intimation letter Ex.R16.

6.       It is admitted fact on record, that the complainant is owner of the vehicle bearing registration No.HR24Q/6205, which was insured with the Op on payment of premium for a period 23.08.2017 to 22.08.2017. The vehicle of the complainant met with an accident on 29.03.2018 and was got repaired by the complainant by making payment from his pocket. Due intimation was given to the OP and the claim was lodged alogwith the bills of repair. Spot survey and final survey was got done by the OP and after inspection, surveyor Sh.Ravi Aggarwal, submitted his report Ex.R3 and assessed the loss to the tune of Rs.54744/-. It is further proved fact on record, that this amount was paid to the complainant by the Op.

7.       Now, the bone of contention between the parties is qua the settlement of claim.  As per contention of the complainant, he lodged claim to the tune of Rs.1,70,840/-  including cost of approximately Rs.1,31,640/- for cost of parts and Rs.39,200/- on account of labour charges, but however, the surveyor has recommended loss to the tune of Rs.54744/-, which has been paid by the Op to him, and this amount is only a meager amount. The complainant deserves for the reimbursement of the total amount of Rs.170840/-.

8.       On the other hand, there is specific plea of the OP that the survey was got conducted in the presence of the complainant after thorough investigation, surveyor assessed the loss to the tune of Rs.54744/-, which has been paid to the complainant. Now, the complainant is not entitled for any other amount. The perusal of the labour charges bill Ex.C6 reveals that this amount has been claimed on account of  RL Door, AC Compressor and Roof Uper and Rs.39,00/- has been claimed as labour charges. It appears that the surveyor has not considered the bills of new parts, old parts and the labour charges carefully. So, it will be in the fitness of things, if the Op is ordered to re-open the case and re-examine and re-evaluate the bills of new parts, old parts and labour charges and pass a fresh order for the settlement of the claim after seeking a fresh report of surveyor by serving 7 days prior notice to the complainant.

9.       In view of the above discussion, we hereby partly allow the present complaint with a direction to the Op to re-open the claim file and appoint another surveyor and after seeking his report, re-examine and re-evaluate the bills of new parts, old parts as well as labour charges and settle the claim of the complainant, thereafter, in the presence of complainant, after serving 7 days prior notice to the complainant and in case, any amount more than the amount, already paid, is found payable to the complainant, the same be paid thereafter, within a period of 30 days from the settlement of claim. The Op is further directed to pay Rs.2,000/- to the complainant as litigation expenses.  A copy of this order be sent to both the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room.

Announced in open Forum.                                       President,

Dated:30.04.2019.                                      District Consumer Disputes

                                                                   Redressal Forum, Sirsa.

                   Member                         Member                                                              

              DCDRF, Sirsa           DCDRF, Sirsa