DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,

PATIALA.

                                      Consumer Complaint No. 24 of 31.1.2017

                                      Decided on:                      14.12.2017

Jyoti Rani wife of late Sh.Murari Lal son of Sh.Musaddi  Lal, resident of Old Grain Market, Ward No.13, Gidherbaha, District Muktsar.

                                                                   …………...Complainant

                                      Versus

1.       Universal Sompo General Insurance Co. Ltd., Divisional Office : Plot No.EL 94, TTC Industrial Area, Mhape, Navi Mumbai-400710 (Maharashtra), through its Divisional Manager.

2.       Universal Sompo General Insurance Co. Ltd.,Branch Office : C/o Lally Motors Pvt. Ltd. Rajpura-Patiala Road, Bahadurgarh, Patiala through its Manager.

3.       Lally Motors Pvt. Ltd. Rajpura-Patiala Road, Bahadurgarh, Patiala through its authorized representative.

                                                                   …………Opposite Parties

                                      Complaint under Section 12 of the

                                      Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

QUORUM

                                      Smt. Neena Sandhu, President

                                      Smt. Neelam Gupta, Member                              

ARGUED BY:

                                      Sh.Vikas Mittal,Adv.counsel for complainant.

                                      Sh.Amit Gupta,Adv.counsel for OPs No.1&2

                                      Opposite Party No.3 ex-parte.                                     

 ORDER

                                    SMT.NEENA SANDHU, PRESIDENT

Smt. Jyoti Rani, complainant has filed this complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986 ( hereinafter referred to as the Act) against the Opposite Parties (hereinafter referred to as the O.Ps.) praying for the following reliefs:-

1. To settle the claim by paying the total loss to the tune of Rs.4,88,257/-
2. To pay Rs.2,00,000/- as compensation on account of harassment & mental torture etc,

3. To pay Rs.25000/- at litigation expenses and
4. To grant any other relief, which this Forum may deem fit.

In the written version filed by OPs No.1&2 preliminary objections taken interalia that the complaint is time barred as the accident has taken placed on 1.3.2014, that this Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint as the policy was purchased from Ludhiana branch office of the company; that the complainant has got no title to file the present complaint as all the legal heirs have not been made party and that the complaint is liable to be dismissed. On merits, it is stated that the complainant or her husband was nothaving any interest in the car in question at the time of accident as the actual owner of the said car at the time of accident was Sh.Paras Jain. The said fact was emerged out during the investigation got conducted through M/s Royal Associates from the statements of Sh.Paras Jain and Sh.Mohit Bansal. It is admitted that the claim was intimated to the OP at Ludhiana office. The claim was repudiated vide letter dated 11.6.2014. There is no deficiency of service on the part of the OPs. After denouncing all other averments made in the complaint, it was prayed to dismiss the complaint.

ANNOUNCED

DATED:14.12.2017     

                                                                   NEENA SANDHU

                                                                       PRESIDENT

                                                                   NEELAM GUPTA

                                                                         MEMBER