DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

WEST TRIPURA :  AGARTALA

 

CASE   NO:   CC- 375 of 2022

 

Sri Swapan Paul,

S/O- Late Nepal Chandra Paul,

Dhaleswar, Road No- 18, 

Agartala- 799007,

District- West Tripura. …...............Complainant.

 

-VERSUS-

 

1. HDFC ERGO GIC Ltd.

 

2. Sri Krishna Enterprise(12568),

 

  __________PRESENT__________

 SRI GOUTAM DEBNATH

PRESIDENT,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER  

DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

      WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA. 

 

DR (SMT) BINDU PAL

MEMBER,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER

DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

  WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA.

 

SRI SAMIR GUPTA

MEMBER,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER  DISPUTES  

REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA. 

 

C O U N S E L

 

 

For the O.P. No.1 : Sri Sampad Choudhury,

 

For the O.P. No.2 : Ex-party.

 

 

 

 

F I N A L    O R D E R

1. The complainant Swapan Paul, has filed this complainant against the O.Ps and in particular against the O.P. No.1 alleging deficiency in service and consequent compensation pleading inter alia that the vehicle of the complainant bearing registration No- TR 01 AK 9745 was duly insured with the O.P No.1. 

1.1 The vehicle met an accident on 22.12.2021 and sustained damaged for which East Agartala P.S. G.D. Entry No-15 was registered.

1.2 The complainant garaged the vehicle with the O.P. No.2 and O.P. No.2 submitted an estimate of Rs.51,773/-. The complainant immediately raised claim with the O.P. No.1 but on 22.02.2022 the O.P. No.1 informed the complainant that only Rs.5414/- will be paid. Hence, this case.

 

2. The O.P. No.2 admitted the fact of parking the vehicle of the complainant in their garage for repairing and that they submitted estimate as stated by the complainant. However, O.P. No.2 pleaded that he is not a necessary party in this case.

2.1 O.P. No.1 submitted written objection alleging interalia  that the complainant did not cooperate with O.P. No.1 by submitting documents on time. Hence, on 22.03.2022 the O.P. No.1 closed the claim alleging non co-operation by the complainant. However, the O.P. No.1 in para- 6 of the written objection pleaded that the O.P. No.1 never informed the complainant that only Rs.5414/- will be paid. 

2.2 The case proceeded exparte against the O.P. No.2 vide order dated 11.01.2023.

 

3. The complainant and the O.P. No.1 submitted evidence on affidavit along with documents.

 

4. Hearing argument the following points emerged for decision:-

 and 

 

5. Both the point are taken up together for convenience.

5.1 The fact of insurance of the vehicle of the complainant with O.P. No.1 is not disputed. The factum of accident and estimate submitted by O.P. No.2 are also not in dispute. Rather, the O.P. No.2 by submitting the written objection admitted the fact of submitting estimate.

5.2 The only dispute in this case is that the complainant did not submit necessary documents with the O.P. No.1. The complainant although advanced the case that the O.P. No.1 proposed to pay a sum of Rs.5414/- but has not proved this fact by submitting any document. Rather, the O.P. No.1 by submitting document has proved letter dated 22.03.2022 that the complainant did not submit all documents claimed by O.P. No.1. However, this fact may be considered for the purpose of payment of interest by the O.P. No.1 and the quantum of compensation, if any, to be paid by O.P. No.1. But for that reason the amount required for repairing the vehicle can not be denied to the complainant as the vehicle of the complainant was duly insured with the O.P. No.1 and the vehicle sustained damage in a Road Traffic Accident. 

6. However, the policy of the complainant is not zero depreciation policy. Hence, as per para- 4  and Annexure- D of the W.S. there shall be depreciation on the rubber item, plastic item. Hence, the surveyor report has to be accepted. Moreso, the complainant has not submitted final estimate from the garage.

7. Both the points are decided.

8. In the result, it is ordered that the O.P. No.1 shall pay Rs.19,476/- to the complainant however, without any further compensation or interest. However, if the O.P. No.1 fails to pay this amount within 30 days from today, the award shall carry interest @ 7.5% P.A. from today till the date of actual payment.  

8. The case stands disposed of. Supply copy of this Final Order free of cost to all the parties. 

 

 Announced.

 

 

 

 

SRI  GOUTAM DEBNATH

PRESIDENT,

DISTRICT CONSUMER  DISPUTES

REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

WEST TRIPURA: AGARTALA

 

 

 

 

DR (SMT)  BINDU  PAL

MEMBER,

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

WEST TRIPURA: AGARTALA

 

 

 

 

SRI SAMIR  GUPTA

MEMBER,

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

WEST TRIPURA: AGARTALA