West Bengal

Nadia

CC/28/2018

Adhir Kumar Ghosh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Branch Manager United India Insurance Co. Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

RAJA BHATTACHARYA

14 Aug 2023

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
NADIA
170,DON BOSCO ROAD, AUSTIN MEMORIAL BUILDING.
NADIA, KRISHNAGAR
 
Complaint Case No. CC/28/2018
( Date of Filing : 07 Mar 2018 )
 
1. Adhir Kumar Ghosh
S/o- Balai Ch. Ghosh Itla Hotel, P.O.- Kalirhat, P.S.- Kotwali PIN- 741102
NADIA
WEST BENGAL
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. Branch Manager United India Insurance Co. Ltd.
Krishnagar Branch Office, 2, D.L.Roy Road, 2ND Floor, Krishnagar, PIN-741101
NADIA
WEST BENGAL
2. Regional Manager, United India Insurance Co. Ltd.
Regional Office- Himalaya House, 2nd & 3rd Floor, 38-B, J.L. Neheru Rd. Kol- 700 071
KOLKATA
WEST BENGAL
3. Managing Director, United India Insurance Co. Ltd.
24, Whites Road, Chennai-600 014
CHENNAI
TAMINARU
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. DAMAN PROSAD BISWAS PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MR. NIROD BARAN ROY CHOWDHURY MEMBER
 
PRESENT:RAJA BHATTACHARYA, Advocate for the Complainant 1
 
Dated : 14 Aug 2023
Final Order / Judgement

Ld. Advocate(s)

For Complainant:  Safikul Alam

For OP/OPs : Raj Kumar Mondal

Date of filing of the case    :07.03.2018

Date of Disposal  of the case :  14.08.2023

 

Final Order / Judgment dtd.  14.08.2023

Complainant above name filed the present complaint u/s 12 Consumer Protection Act 1986 praying for direction upon the OP to pay amount of  Rs. 75,955/-, compensation amounting to Rs. 20,000/- and cost of the case amounting to Rs. 20,000/- and other reliefs.

 He alleged in the petition of complaint that complainant is usually engaged in transport business inter-alia includes buses in long route for hire purpose. His bus vide no. WB-51-7322 was going from Jowai  in the state of Maghalaya and was proceeding towards Guwahati on 27.10.2017 . Said bus met with an accident and hit  with a  truck vide registration  no.  RJ 23 GB 2397 at 9:00PM. As a result the  bus suffers huge damages. Thereafter, said bus  brought to East Khasi Hills Police Station  and after  completion of all legal formality  his bus was released from East  Khasi Hills Police Station.

Complainant has an Insurance Policy with United India Insurance Company Limited. Inspector of the respondent company visited  at Tarama Body Builders , Radhanagar, near TV Tower Krishnagar  on 22.11.2017 where the aforesaid  bus was garaged. After preliminary inquiry allowed the bus body parts to be separated / opened/ segregated for the purposes of repairing. Said surveyor once again visited the said bus on 27.11.2017 and after getting necessary approval  at the conclusion of inspection by the Surveyor, OP  directed the complainant to proceed with  repairing work. Repairing work  was monitored and  was conducted under auspice of OP.   Complainant submitted all the bills and vouchers regarding repairing work. Total bill of the repairing was Rs. 90,840/- of which  labour bill Rs. 60,000/- and parts bill was 30,840/- but OP allowed only Rs. 14,885/-.

 Hence, the complainant filed this case.

OP contests the case by filing a W/V and he denied the entire allegations. He further contended they received claim intimation on 14.11.2017. Surveyor   and loss assessor   submitted its report and considering of Surveyor report  they allowed  the claim  of Rs. 14,885/-  and they paid the same to the complainant t through his bank . He prays for dismissal of the case.

TRIAL

During trial complainant filed affidavit-in-chief. Complainant filed questionnaire. OP gave answer.  

 

DOCUMENTS

         Complainant produced following documents:

  1. Copy of recommendation sheet dtd. 08.08.2004.  ( one sheet .....Xerox).
  2. Copy of assessment sheet. ( one sheet .....Xerox).
  3. Copy of note of garage . ( one sheet .....Xerox).
  4. Copy of acceptance note. ( one sheet .....Xerox).

     5      Copy of notice of Mawryngkneng Police Station East Khasi Hills Dist: Meghalaya dtd. 07.11.2017. ( one sheet .....Xerox.... annexure : A).

6.Copy of letter issued by  Adhir Kumar Ghose addressed to The  Branch Manager United India Insurance Co. Ltd. dtd. 03.01.2018. ( one sheet .....Xerox.... annexure : B).

7.Copy of cash Memo  of BIswas Hardare dtd. 16.12.2017 . ( one sheet .....Xerox.... B:1).

8. Copy of cash memo of Pappu Auto Electric Works. ( one sheet .....Xerox.... B:2).

9. Copy of bill of Debu Brothers dtd. 04.12.2017. ( one sheet .....Xerox.... B:3).

10. Copy of  estimate of bill of TATAMA BODY BUILDERS dtd. 30.12.2017  . ( one sheet .....Xerox.... B:4).

11. Copy of bill of TATAMA BODY BUILDERS . ( one sheet .....Xerox.... B:5).

12. Copy of letter of United India  Insurance Company Limited dtd. 19.01.2018  ( one sheet....  xerox ... C:1).

13. Copy of settlement intimation voucher ( one sheet....  Xerox ... C:2).

14. Copy of letter of United India  Insurance Company Limited dtd. 06.02.2018 dtd. 06.02.2018. ( one sheet....  Xerox ... C:3).

15. Copy of letter issued by Sapan Kapoor addressed to Mr. Adhir Ghosh d td. 24.01.2018. ( one sheet....  Xerox ... C:4).

16.  Copy of  grievance view of United India Insurance Co. Ltd. ( 2 sheet....  Xerox ...  ).

17. Copy of certificate of registration. Dtd. 24.06.2009.  ( one sheet .... xerox )

 

 

 

OP  produced following documents:

  1. Copy of Private & Confidential Motor ( Final ) Survey Report  of Mr. Sapan Kapoor dtd. 18.12.2017. ( three sheet  ... xerox)
  2.  Copy of MOTOR CLAIM NOTE OF United Indai Insurance Company Ltd.( two sheet .... xerox)

BNA

         Complainant filed BNA. OP filed BNA.

DECISION WITH REASONS

We have carefully gone through the petition of complaint filed by the complainant, W/V filed by the complainant, W/V filed by the OP,  affidavit-in-chief filed by the complainant , BNA filed by the complainant and BNA filed by the OP.

 On perusal of affidavit-in-chief filed by complainant we find that he corroborated his allegation which he made in the petition of complaint.

 It is admitted position  that complaint’s aforesaid vehicle was insured under the OP no. 1-3.

 It is also admitted position that during validity period of the aforesaid Insurance Policy , aforesaid vehicle met with an accident at Maghalaya. Thereafter, the case was started and after release of the vehicle complainant brought the same and kept in the garage. It is also admitted position that complaint informed  that entire matter  to the OP no. 1. about the accident of   aforesaid  vehicle and OP no.1 approved the cost of  repairing   as Rs. 14,885/-. It is the allegation of the complainant that he spent Rs. 90,840/- but OP no. did not approved the same.

 Perused the documents filed by the complainant we find that the complainant produced the   vouchers in respect of purchased of parts amounting of Rs. 8,140/- from Biswas Hadrware  . He also produced vouchers in respect of total wearing and starting switch  amounting to Rs. 10,300/-. Complainant also produced payment receipt in respect of payment of Rs.90,840/-. Perused report of the Surveyor produced by OP we find that Surveyor Sapan Kapoor  submitted the details  report before the OP. He approved the Rs, 15,775/- as approximately net loss. Ld Adv. for the complainant argued at the time of hearing that actually he is entitled to RS. 90,840/- but OP did not allowed the same.

 On perusal of surveyor report  we find that surveyor did not approved the repairing cost in respect of repairing of the aforesaid vehicle. Survivor also did not approved all the vouchers submitted by the OP. Surveyor categorically mentioned  about the entitlement of the complainant but we find that OP did not considered wearing cost starting  switch and cost of the ply board amounting to Rs. 10,300/- and Rs. 12,400/-. He did not assigned are reasons as to why complainant will not get reimbursement of aforesaid charges.

Considering all the  facts and circumstance  of the case we think that complainant should be provided with Rs. 10,300/- as total wearing and switching  and cost of ply board amounting to Rs. 12,400/-.

On  perusal of the record  it is clear before us that  complainant is a consumer and OP no.1-3 are the service provider.

Having  considered  the entire matter we think that complainant should be further allowed to Rs. 10,300/- and Rs. 12,400/-.

 Accordingly, we find that complainant has able to established his grievance  and he is entitled  to relief as per prayer .

In the result present case succeeds.

Hence,

It is

                                                Ordered

that the present case be and the same is allowed  on contest  against the OP no.1 and allowed ex-parte against  OP no. 2 and 3 with cost of Rs. 5,000/- to be paid by OP no.1 in favour of the complainant.

 OP no.1 -3 jointly or severally  are directed to  pay Rs.22,700/- ( twenty two thousand seven hundred) in favour of the complainant  for  within the 45 days from this date failing which aforesaid amount shall carry interest  @9% per annum from this date  to till the date of  actual payment  and complainant shall have liberty put this order into execution.

 OP no. 1 and 2 jointly or severally are further directed to pay Rs. 10,000/- in favour of the complainant for his harassment  , mental pain and agony within 45 days from this date failing which aforesaid amount shall carry interest @9% per annum from this date to till  the date of actual payment and complainant shall have liberty put this order into execution.

Let a copy of this order be supplied to both the parties as free of cost.

Dictated & corrected by me

 

              ............................................

                                   PRESIDENT

 (Shri   DAMAN PROSAD BISWAS,)                       .................................................

 

                                                                                                                       PRESIDENT

                                                                                         (Shri   DAMAN PROSAD BISWAS,)       

            I  concur,

 

             ........................................                                                                                    

                       MEMBER                                                                                                                                                                                           

 (NIROD  BARAN   ROY  CHOWDHURY)                                    

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. DAMAN PROSAD BISWAS]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[HON'BLE MR. NIROD BARAN ROY CHOWDHURY]
MEMBER
 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.