Professional Documents
Culture Documents
...... Complainant.
Vs.
1.The Manager,
HDFC Chubb General Insurance Co. Ltd.
Christian Basti, Guwahati,
......
02.02.2013.
......
31.05.2013.
APPEARANCES :
For the complainant ......
Mr. P. Singh,
Advocate, Golaghat.
AND
For the opposite party ......
PRESENT :
SHRI T. LOHAR,
PRESIDENT, DISTRICT FORUM,
GOLAGHAT.
SRI A. BARUAH,
MEMBER, DISTRICT FFOFRUM,
GOLAGHAT.
1.
Consumer Protection Act filed by Md. Dijaul alam Ahmed, son of Md.
Alimuddin Ahmed, resident of Kacharihat, Bongaon, district- Golaghat
(hereinafter called as complainant) against the opposite party No.1,
the Manager, HDFC Chubb General Insurance Co. Ltd., Christian
Basti, Guwahati , opposite party, No.2 HDFC Chubb General
Insurance Co. Ltd., DBS House, Room No.212, 10/2 Hunger Fort
Street, Kolkata and opposite party No. 3, M/S Ghosh Brothers Auto
Mobiles, G.S. Road, Christian Basti, Guwahati, claiming compensation
of an amount of Rs. 39,542'00 as cost of repair of vehicle,
Rs.25,000'00 for mental shock and pain and another Rs.25,000'00 for
deficiency in service, cost of the case and interest @ 12% per annum
from the date of accident which took place on 28.2.2006.
2.
he is the
the Forum and submitted the written statement stating therein that the
complaint petition is not maintainable for non-joinder and misjoinder
of necessary parties ; that the complaint petition is barred by limitation
; that the complainant failed to submit the required documents for
settlement of the claim. The opposite party vide letter
dated 6.6.2006 informed the complainant that the claim has been
pending for more than 60 days and the same could not processed for
non-submission of required documents. For the negligence of the
complainant himself, the answering opposite parties are not liable to
pay any compensation. The complainant was asked vide letter dated
3.4.2006, and again vide letter dated 6.6.2006 that the requisite papers
are not submitted for settlement of the claim and as such, the claim
could not be settled and the same was treated as withdrawn. The
answering opposite parties vide letter dated 6.6.2006 repudiated the
claim of the complainant.
5.
1.
6.
and C. W. 2 to prove his case, whereas, the opposite parties did not
adduce any evidence inspite of giving several chances to them.
7.
documents.
9.
as available on record.
ISSUES NO. 1 :
10.
hence, for the sake of convenience, all the aforesaid three issues are
taken up together for discussions.
12.
already submitted the claim form before the O.P. No.1 The matter of
accident was not reported to the police. The vehicle involved in the
accident just after three and half hours of its purchased. Therefore,
question of submission of Registration Certificate Book does not arise.
The vehicle met with the accident within the grace period of 7 days as
per provisions of Section 43(3) of the Motor Vehicle Act. The opposite
parties have stated in Para 8 of their written statement the
complainant was requested for submission of authorization letter for
signing the claim form, as well as the Registration Certificate of the
vehicle, but he failed to submit the same. Therefore, the opposite party
vide their letter dated 6.6.2006 informed the complainant that the claim
has been pending for more than 60 days and the same could not be
processed for non-submission of above documents and treated the
claim as withdrawn. The copy of the said letter dated 6.6.2006 has
been annexed with the written statement and marked with Annexure-I.
The said Annexure-I is the photo copy of the original and some portion
of it is illegible. When we read Annexure-I along with Ext-8, we find
that the contents of both the documents are almost identical, but the
date and period of pending the claim for are different. The opposite
parties by Ext-8, the letter dated 3.4.2006 treated the claim as
withdrawn. Then how did again the same motor claim had withdrawn
in second time on 6.6.2006.
14.
has not been sent to him by the opposite parties. From the evidence on
record, we find that actually the Annexure-I has not been received by
the complainant and opposite party has not taken any care to prove the
said fact that the said document has been received by the complainant.
So, we can safely be concluded that Annexure -I has not been received
by the complainant.
15.
by registered post to the O.P. No.1 with a request to settle the claim.
Ext-5 is the said Advocate's notice. Ext-6 is the postal registration
receipt of sending the Ext-5 to the O.P. No.1. But the O.P. No.1 has not
taken any care to settle the claim of the complainant. Therefore, the
complainant has rightly stated that the cause of action arose on the said
date when the O.P. No.1 neither settled the claim of the complainant
nor repudiated the claim.
16.
insured the vehicle without having any registration and the O.P. No.1
has received Rs.13,613'00 as premium on 28.2.2006 at 7'32 P.M. Then
after three and half hours, on the same day, the said vehicle had met
with an accident. Now, the O.P. No.1 has no right to say that as the
complainant
vehicle, therefore, the claim form has withdrawn, as because, the O.P.
No.1 without having registration of the vehicle insured it with them
and therefore, there is negligence and deficiency in service on the part
of the O.P. No.1.
17.
The complainant has exhibited the documents, such as Ext-1, the Cover note-cum-insurance policy ;
Ext-2, the delivery challan, dated 28.2.2006,
Ext-3, the delivery receipt of Ghosh Brothers Automobiles;
Ext- 4, the vehicle delivery acknowledgment note,
Ext-5, the Lawyer's notice, dated 27.6.2008'
Ext-6, the postal receipt, dated 27.6.08,
Ext-7, the vehicle repairing bill/cost of Ghosh Brothers, and
Ext-8, the letter dated 3.4.2006.
18.
has been shown as Rs. 39,542'74. This Ext-7 has not been challenged
by the opposite parties. Hence, Ext-7 is accepted as true. Therefore, the
complainant is entitled to get Rs.39,542'00 as compensation for cost of
repairing of the vehicle along with Rs.20,000'00 for his mental shock,
pain and for deficiency in service on the part of the O.P. No.1 and 2
along with cost of the case. The complainant is also entitled to get the
interest on the aforesaid compensated amount at the rate of 6% per
annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till realization of the
entire amount. The opposite parties Nos. 1 and 2 are directed to pay the
aforesaid compensated amount along with interest thereon to the
complainant within 60 days from today.
19.
the O.P. Nos. 1 and 2 as stated above. The O.P. No.3 is exempted from
this case.
20.
( T. Lohar ),
PRESIDENT,
DISTRICT FORUM,
GOLAGHAT.
Dictated & Corrected
by me.
( T. Lohar ),
PRESIDENT,
DISTRICT FORUM,
GOLAGHAT.
( A. Baruah ),
MEMBER,
DISTRICT FORUM,
GOLAGHAT.