Haryana

Sonipat

CC/154/2015

Devender Singh S/o Sh. Hawa Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Sandeep Dahiya

12 Apr 2016

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,

SONEPAT.       

 

                                Complaint No.154 of 2015

                                Instituted on:11.05.2015                                              Date of order:12.04.2016

 

Devender Singh son of Hawa Singh, resident of village Madina, tehsil Gohana, distt. Sonepat.

..Complainant

                            Versus

 

Reliance General Ins. Co. Ltd., having its registered office at 19, Reliance Centre, Walchand Hirachand Marg, Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400001 having its Branch office at Pawan Mega Mall, 2^nd Floor in front of HDFC Bank, near Subhash Chowk, Sonepat through its Branch Manager.

..Respondent.

 

COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 12 OF       

THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986

 

Argued by: Sh. Sandeep Dahiya, Advocate for complainant.

           Sh. Joginder Kuhar Adv. for respondent.

 

BEFORE     NAGENDER SINGH, PRESIDENT.

          PRABHA WATI, MEMBER.

         

O R D E R

 

        Complainant has filed the present complaint against the

respondent alleging himself to be the registered owner of Hyundai EO ERA no.HR11E/3195 and the same was insured with the respondent for the period w.e.f. 19.7.2013 to 18.7.2014 and unfortunately on 8.3.2014 the said vehicle has met with an accident and was got damaged. DD no.22 dated 8.3.2014 was got registered with PS Murthal.  The complainant has intimated the respondent and has submitted all the required documents, but till date, the claim has not been settled by the complainant and that amounts to a grave deficiency in service on the part of the respondent. So, he has come to this Forum and has filed the present complaint.

2.        The respondent appeared and has filed its reply and has submitted that the complainant has no insurable interest as at the time of alleged accident the vehicle in question was sold to and used by one Sambandh Singh without the said transaction being effected in RC as well as in the insurance policy.  So, the complainant is not entitled for any relief and compensation as he was not having any insurable interest and non-settlement of the claim of the complainant is justified and thus, prayed for the dismissal of the present complaint.

3.        We have heard the arguments advanced by ld. Counsel for both the parties at length and we have also gone through the entire relevant material available on the case file carefully & minutely.

4.        Ld. Counsel for the complainant has argued that unfortunately on 8.3.2014 the vehicle no.HR11E/3195 which was insured with the respondent for the period w.e.f. 19.7.2013 to 18.7.2014, has met with an accident and was got damaged. DD no.22 dated 8.3.2014 was got registered with PS Murthal.  The complainant has intimated the respondent and has submitted all the required documents, but till date, the claim has not been settled by the complainant and that amounts to a grave deficiency in service on the part of the respondent.

          Ld. Counsel for the respondent has submitted that the complainant has no insurable interest as at the time of alleged accident the vehicle in question was sold to and used by one Sambandh Singh without the said transaction being effected in RC as well as in the insurance policy.  So, the complainant is not entitled for any relief and compensation as he was not having any insurable interest and non-settlement of the claim of the complainant is justified.

          In the present case, there is no dispute with regard to the fact that the vehicle was insured with the respondent for the period w.e.f. 19.7.2013 to 18.7.2014 and the RC of the vehicle was also in the name of the complainant.  The surveyor was appointed by the insurance company, who has assessed the loss to the tune of Rs.96477/-.  In our view, the complainant is entitled to get the amount of Rs.96477/-  as was assessed by the surveyor, because as per various authoritative orders of the Hon’ble National Commission and State Commissions, the surveyor is the best person to assess the loss and his report cannot be brushed aside.  Thus, we hereby direct the respondent insurance company to make the payment of Rs.96477/- to the complainant within a period of 45 days from the date of passing of this order, failing which, the above said amount shall fetch interest at the rate of 09% per annum from the date of passing of this order till its realization.

          With these observations, findings and directions, the present complaint stands allowed partly.

          Certified copy of this order be provided to both the parties free of costs.

File be consigned to the record-room.

 

 

(Prabha Wati)                       (Nagender Singh-President)

 Member DCDRF                          DCDRF, Sonepat.

 

Announced:12.04.2016