BEFORE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SOLAN, H.P.



Consumer Complaint No: 136/2008

Date of presentation: 04.09.2008

Date of decision: 13.03.2009



****************

Shri Sunil S/O Shri Amar Dass, R/O Village Devri, Post Office Garkhal, Tehsil Kasauli, Disrict Solan, H.P.



… Complainant.

Versus



1. Reliance General Insurance Company Limited, Registered Office, Reliance Centre, 19, Walchand Hira Chand Marg, Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400038, through its Managing Director/Incharge.



2. Reliance General Insurance Company Limited

having its Office Sector 34-C, Chandigarh, U.T. through its Manager/Incharge.



3. Reliance General Insurance Company Limited

Office Near District Court Solan, Tehsil and District Solan, H.P.





…Opposite Parties.

Coram



Shri Pritam Singh (District Judge) President.

Mr. Varinder Thakur, Member (Male)

Ms. Aruna Sharma, Member (Female)

…………………………………………………………………………



For the complainant: Mr. R.L. Kaushal, Advocate.

For the Opposite Parties: Exparte.



O R D E R:

Pritam Singh (District Judge) President:- This order shall dispose of complaint filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The case of the complainant in brief is that he is registered owner of truck bearing registration No.HP-64-0415, which was duly insured with the OPs-Company vide insurance policy bearing No.1506062329004067 for a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- effective from 05.04.2007 to 04.04.2007 on payment of premium. That on 04.07.2007 at about 2.30 PM, due to short circuit fire broke out in the cabin of the aforesaid insured truck thereby causing extensive loss to the cabin portion and other portion of truck. That the factum of the fire incident was reported to the police and intimation in this behalf was also sent to the OPs-Company. Thereafter, he got the aforesaid truck repaired from M/S Rajiv Motors, Chandigarh entailing expenditure of about Rs.1,50,000/-, and preferred the insurance claim with the OPs-Company. But, the OPs-Company paid only Rs.33,625/- to his financier, Magma Leasing Limited without his consent and declined remaining payment of Rs.85,291/-. Hence, feeling dissatisfied and aggrieved by the act of the OPs-Company, the complainant perforce filed this complaint against the OPs-Company.

2. The notices of this complaint were issued to the OPs through registered post, but the OPs despite valid service through registered AD did not put in appearance. Hence, the complaint was ordered to be heard exparte against OPs.

3. We have heard the learned counsel for the complainant at length and have also thoroughly scanned the entire record of the case.

4. It may be stated that the complainant in support of his claim has placed on record copy of insurance cover note Annexure C-1 vide which the truck bearing registration No.HP-64-0415, was duly insured with the OPs-Company for a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- on insured’s declared value, effective from 05.04.2007 to 04.04.2008. Annexure C-2 is the copy of the premium computation table vide which a sum of Rs.11,087/- was charged as premium by the OPs-Company from the complainant. Similarly, Annexure C-3 is copy of certificate of insurance issued by the OPs-Company. Annexure C-3-A is copy of legal notice issued by the complainant to the OPs-Company calling upon them to pay the remaining sum of Rs.85,291/-.Whereas, Annexure C-6 is copy of retail invoice dated issued by Rajiv Motor and Annexure C-7 & C-8 are copies of memo dated 23.11.2007 & 22.11.2007 issued by Surjit Recovery Service and Ramesh Auto Work. The complainant also filed his affidavit in support of the complaint.

5. The oral and documentary evidence led on record by complainant remained uncontroverted. Thus, from the combined and harmonious reading of the aforesaid unrebutted evidence, it stands established on record that fire broke out in cabin of truck bearing registration No.HP-64-0415 duly insured with the OPs-Company due to short circuit causing extensive damage to its cabin and other parts.

5. It may not be out of place to state here that according to the complainant, he incurred total expenses of Rs.1.50 on repairs of the truck in question to make it road worthy, but the complainant has placed on record and relied upon the repair charges bills Annexure C-6 to C-8 to the tune of Rs.85,291/-. No documentary proof has been led on record by the complainant to fortify his allegation that in addition to the aforesaid repair charges, he in fact incurred total repair expenses to the tune of Rs.1.50 lacs. It is also admitted case of the complainant that the OP-Company released sum of Rs.33,625/- to his fancier, i.e. Megma Leasing Limited. Therefore, in the circumstances of the case, we hold that the complainant is entitled to remaining payment of Rs.85,291/- minus Rs.33,625/-, = Rs.51,666/- and the OPs-Company is legally bound to indemnify the complainant to this extent.

6. For the foregoing reasons, we allow this complaint and direct the OPs-Company exparte to indemnify the complainant to the extent of Rs.51,666/- along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of the complaint, i.e. 22.08.2008, till making full payment of aforesaid amount. The litigation cost is quantified at Rs.1000/- payable by the OPs-Company to the complainant. This order shall be complied with by the OPs-Company within a period of forty five days after the date of receipt of copy of this order. The learned counsel for the complainant has undertaken to collect the certified copy of this order from the office, free of cost, as per rules, whereas the certified copy of this order shall be sent to the OPs through UPC. The file after due completion, be consigned to record room.

Announced on this the 13th day of March, 2009.



(Pritam Singh)

President.