Haryana

StateCommission

A/409/2015

KAUSHAL - Complainant(s)

Versus

UNIVERSAL SAMPO GENERAL INSURANCE CO.LTD. - Opp.Party(s)

VIKRAM SINGH

04 Aug 2016

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA, PANCHKULA

                                                 

                                                         First Appeal No.409 of 2015

Date of Institution: 04.05.2015

                                                               Date of Decision: 04.08.2016

 

Kaushal S/o Sh. Uggar Sain R/o Gali No.1, Shiv Colony, Karnal.

 

…..Appellant

Versus

 

Universal Sampo General Insurance Company Ltd. Registered Office 201-208, Crystal Plaza, Opposite Infiniti Mall, Link road,Andheri West, Mumbai 400058 Second Address through its divisional Manager, Mansa Devi complex, Panchkula.

                                      …..Respondent

 

CORAM:             Mr. R.K.Bishnoi, Judicial Member.

                             Mrs. Urvashi Agnihotri, Member.                                                                                                                                        

Present:              Shri Sawan Chaudhary, Advocate counsel for appellant.

                             Shri Sahil Abhi, Advocate counsel for the respondents.

 

                                                   O R D E R

R.K.BISHNOI, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

 

It was alleged by the complainant that he purchased an insurance policy about his vehicle bearing registration  No.HR-12-J-4747 for the period 29.07.2009 to 28.07.2010.  He paid Rs.3095/- in cash to the agent of the opposite party (O.P.) at Karnal and he issued cover note bearing NO.036769 dated 29.07.2009, but, he connived with respondent/O.P. and issued a cheque of Rs.2895/-.  When he paid Rs.3095/- in cash there was no question of issuing cheque.  In this way insurance company played fraud with him and cheated by alleging that he paid Rs.2895/- by way of cheque which was dishonoured.  Due to this reason an award of Rs.2,50,000/- was passed against respondent.  As there was deficiency in service on the part of the respondent/O.P. it be directed to pay Rs.2,50,000/- besides Rs.1,00,000/- on account of other compensation.

2.      O.P. filed reply controverting his averments and alleged that question of liability to pay compensation is already decided by MACT Karnal on 14.03.2011 and this complaint is not maintainable.  It was opined in that case that cheque paid by owner of the vehicle as of premium was dishonoured and policy stood cancelled.  Letter was also written to the owner about the cancellation of the policy.  Appeal filed against the award pronounced by  MACT was pending before Hon’ble High Court.  Story introduced by complainant about payment was altogether wrong.  Actually cheque of Rs.2895/- was received which was dishonoured and thereafter aforesaid cover note was also cancelled.  There was no deficiency in service on it’s part.  The consumer fora was not having jurisdiction to try the complaint.  Objections about locus standi, etc. were also raised and requested to dismiss the complaint.

3.      After hearing both the parties learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Karnal, (In short “District Forum”) dismissed the complaint vide impugned order dated 17.03.2015.

4.      Feeling aggrieved therefrom, complainant has preferred this appeal.

5.      Arguments heard. File perused.

6.      Learned counsel for the appellant vehemently argued that there was no question of giving intimation to him about dishonor of cheque and cancellation of policy, because he was in custody from 30.06.2009 to 08.05.2010 (as per jail certificate) put up during the arguments.  He was proceeded against ex parte before MACT and was not afforded an opportunity to put forward his case. From the perusal of proposal form Ex.C-2 it is clear that Rs.3095/- were paid in cash.  Learned District Forum failed to take into consideration this aspect and wrongly dismissed his complaint. So impugned order be set aside and he be awarded compensation as prayed for.

7.      This argument is of no avail.  Hon’ble High court has already adjudicated upon this matter in FAO No.4293 of 2011 vide order dated 04.07.2013.  When Hon’ble High court has already decided this matter the same cannot be agitated before consumer Fora.  Complainant/appellant was party in proceedings before MACT as well as Hon’ble High Court. If he was having any grouse, then he should have moved an application to set aside ex parte proceedings and allow him to join the proceedings, so that he can put-forward his case.  Consumer  fora cannot sit over the judgement of the civil court, so this complaint is not maintainable.

8.      Further, why he did not produce jail certificate dated 07.01.2012 before the learned District Forum is no-where explained. This complaint was decided on 17.03.2015 and he was having sufficient time to produce it before the learned District Forum.  Even otherwise as per this certificate his version cannot be believed to be true.  It is alleged by the complainant that he paid Rs.3095/- in cash on 29.07.2009 to the agent of O.P.  As per this certificate he was in custody since 30.06.2009 up to 08.05.2010. When he was in custody on 29.07.2009 then how he gave this amount in cash is no-where explained. This fact also falsifies his version.  It is alleged by the complainant that the pleadings raised by O.P. before MACT were wrong.  If he wanted any action against O.P. about those pleadings, he should have move an application under section 340 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (In short “Cr.P.C.”) before the competent Court.  Moreover, it is alleged by complainant that he gave Rs.3095/- in cash to Ajay Kumar, but, he is not impleaded as a party. When he is impleaded as a party the complaint is bad on ground of non-joinder of necessary party also . So these arguments are of no avail. Findings of learned District Forum are well reasoned based on law and facts and cannot be disturbed.  Resultantly appeal fails and the same is hereby dismissed.

 

 

August 04th, 2016       Urvashi Agnihotri                                R.K.Bishnoi,                                                               Member                                              Judicial Member                                                         Addl. Bench                                        Addl.Bench                

S.K.