DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, NORTH-WEST
GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI
CSC-BLOCK-C, POCKET-C, SHALIMAR BAGH, DELHI-110088.
CC No: 359/2019
No. __________________ Dated : ____________________
IN THE MATTER OF:
RAJ KUMAR SINGH,
R/O D-74, ANANDPUR DHAM,
KARALA, DELHI. …COMPLAINANT
VERSUS
1. KOTAK MAHINDRA GIC LTD.,
(THROUGH ITS GENERAL MANAGER),
REGD. OFFICE: 27, BKC-C-27,
G-BLOCK, BANDRA KURLA COMPLEX,
BANDRA EAST MUMBAI-400051
2. BRANCH OFFICE AT:
KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LTD.,
PRASHANT VIHAR, NEW DELHI. …OPPOSITE PARTY (IES)
CORAM: SH. M.K. GUPTA, PRESIDENT
SH. BARIQ AHMAD, MEMBER
MS. USHA KHANNA, MEMBER
Date of Institution: 01.05.2019
Date of Decision: 02.07.2019
SH. M.K. GUPTA, PRESIDENT
ORDER
1. The complainant has filed the present complaint against OPs underSection 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 therebyalleging that one of the official named Mr. Vivek from OP-2 met the complainant at his above-mentioned office address and offered insurance of the vehicle bearing no. DL-3C-BL-1018 of the
CC No. 359/2019 Page 1 of 5
complainant and provided some quotation and one time premium of Rs.7,431/- was asked which was paid by the complainant vide DD bearing no. 175530 dated 07.12.2018 in favour of Kotak Mahindra GIC Ltd. for a sum of Rs.7,431/- to Sh. Vivek on the same day who assured that the Insurance related documents shall be provided soon. The complainant further alleged that the said vehicle met with an accident at Gorakhpur (U.P.) on 25.12.2018 and had to visit the workshop for repairing which cost came to Rs.31,000/-. The complainant informed about this incident to Mr. Vivek who suggested the complainant to make payment in the workshop and that the amount shall be refunded by the company upon formal enquiry and the complainant made payment to the workshop for repair of the damages. The complainant further alleged that he visited several times OP-2 and every time he was assured that some formalities are to be completed and upon persistent visit and request by the complainant, OP-2 issued a DD in favour of the complainant for a sum of Rs.7,431/- on 07.03.2019 which is illegal and unjustified and clearly proves negligence and deficiency in service on the part of OP as the complainant has suffered loss around Rs.31,000/- besides mental pain, agony and harassment. The complainant got sent a legal notice through his Counsel to OP on 12.03.2019 and OP sent a vague reply but OP did not give compensation etc. till date.
CC No. 359/2019 Page 2 of 5
2. On these allegations, the complainant has filed a complaint praying for direction to OP to pay a sum of Rs.31,000/- towards the repair of the vehicle and has also sought compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- for causing harassment, mental agony etc. and has also sought Rs.25,000/- as cost of litigation.
3. We have heard the Counsel for the complainant on the admissibility of the case and have considered the case of the complainant. The complainant hasalleged in the complaint that OP has not refunded the cost of repair of the vehicle which the complainant has insured with OP and had paid premium of Rs.7,431/- by means of DD.
4. The complainant has not placed on record copy of Insurance Policy or the cover note in respect of the vehicle in question which might have been issued by OP. It is not the case of the complainant that OP has accepted the proposal for issuing an Insurance Policy in respect of the vehicle of the complainant. Moreover, the complainant has placed on record copy of reply dated 27.03.2019 sent by OP in pursuance to the legal notice dated 12.03.2019. In the reply, OP has contended that the motor vehicle of the complainant was not having continuity in Insurance period and as per the prevailing practice, the Insurance company inspect the vehicle before acceptance of risk and the official of the company made several calls to the complainant and the complainant failed to provide the vehicle for inspection and due which the OP returned
CC No. 359/2019 Page 3 of 5
the DD by speed post on 07.03.2019 and further the OP has not accepted the proposal for insurance policy and no Insurance Policy was issued to the complainant.
5. The first and foremost question which arises for consideration is “whether or not the complainant is a consumer” as envisaged u/s 2 (1)(d) of the C.P. Act, 1986 and “whether the complaint is maintainable”.
6. In order to find answer to this question it would be useful to consider Sec. 2 (1)(d) of the C.P. Act, 1986, which defines the term “Consumer”. On reading the said Section it is clear that Consumer is a person who buys goods for consideration or hires or avail of service for consideration. There is an exception to the explanation
by providing that if the person hires or avails service for consideration for commercial purpose, he would not be termed as “Consumer”.
7. Ld. Counsel for the complainant contended that once the complainant has paid the premium of Rs.7,431/- by means of Demand Draft to the representative of OP for issuance of Insurance Policy towards Insurance of the vehicle of the complainant and the Insurance Company cannot backout from its liability to pay repair charges when the vehicle has met with an accident.
8. We are not convinced with the aforesaid submissions of learned Counsel for the complainant. As per reply sent by OP to the legal
CC No. 359/2019 Page 4 of 5
notice of the complainant, it is established that the OP has not accepted the proposal for issuance of Insurance Policy of the vehicle of the complainant and OP has not issued any Insurance Policy nor issued any cover note to the complainant. Thus, it cannot be said that there has been a valid and binding contract of insurance between the parties. It can also not be said that the complainant is covered under the definition of the term “Consumer” as per Sec. 2 (1) (d) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. Thus, the complaint is devoid of any merits and the same is dismissed with special cost of Rs.5,000/- on the complainant which be deposited with “State Consumer Welfare Fund” within 4 weeks.
9. Let a copy of this order be sent to each party free of cost as per regulation 21 of The Consumer Protection Regulations-2005. Therefore, file be consigned to record room.
Announced on this 2ndday of July, 2019.
BARIQ AHMAD USHA KHANNA M.K.GUPTA
(MEMBER) (MENBER) (PRESIDENT)
CC No. 359/2019 Page 5 of 5
