State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Sh. Preet Pal. vs United India Insurance Co. Ltd. on 1 May, 2017
H. P. STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL
COMMISSION SHIMLA.
First Appeal No. : 357/2016
Date of Presentation: 17.11.2016
Order Reserved On : 28.03.2017
Date of Order : 01.05.2017
...
Preet Pal son of Shri Bir Singh resident of Village and Post Office
Pangi Tehsil Kalpa District Kinnaur-H.P.
...... Appellant/complainant
Versus
The United India Insurance Company Ltd. through its
Divisional Manager Divisional Office Timber House Cart Road
Shimla (H.P.) 171 001.
......Respondent/opposite party
Coram
Hon'ble Justice P.S. Rana (R) President
Hon'ble Mr. Vijay Pal Khachi Member
Hon'ble Ms. Meena Verma Member
Whether approved for reporting?1 Yes.
For Appellant : Mr. Sanjay Gandhi vice Mr. Sanjay
Kumar Sharma Advocate.
For Respondent : Mr. Jagdish Thakur Advocate.
JUSTICE P.S. RANA (R) PRESIDENT:
O R D E R :- Present appeal is filed under section 15 of Consumer Protection Act 1986 against order dated 05.08.2016 passed by Learned District Forum Shimla in consumer complaint No.62/2013 title Preet Pal Versus United India Insurance Company Ltd.
1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the order? Yes. Preet Pal Versus The United India Insurance Company Ltd.
(F.A. No.357/2016) Brief facts of Case:
2. Shri Preet Pal complainant filed complaint under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act 1986 pleaded therein that complainant is owner of vehicle bearing registration No.H.P-52A-6236 which was insured with opposite party w.e.f. 31.05.2011 to 30.05.2012 vide policy No.1113833/31/ 11/01/00000123 in the sum of Rs.599900/-(Five lac ninety nine thousand nine hundred). It is pleaded that vehicle met with accident on 13.10.2011 at place Pangi Nala near Pangi village, Tehsil Kalpa District Kinnaur-H.P. It is further pleaded that factum of accident was brought to notice of opposite party and DDR No.19A dated 13.10.2011 was also filed in police station Reckong Peo. It is further pleaded that complainant supplied all the documents as required by surveyor and opposite party. It is pleaded that as per instruction of surveyor and opposite party complainant repaired vehicle and expenditure to the tune of Rs.478006/-
(Four lac seventy eight thousand & six) was incurred. It is further pleaded that claim of complainant was repudiated vide document Annexure-C6 on dated 12.06.2012. Complainant sought relief of payment of Rs.478006/-(Four lac seventy eight thousand & six) alongwith interest at the rate of 12% per annum. In addition complainant sought relief of Rs.1.00 lac on account of harassment. In addition complainant also 2 Preet Pal Versus The United India Insurance Company Ltd.
(F.A. No.357/2016) sought litigation costs to the tune of Rs.15000/-(Fifteen thousand).
3. Per contra version filed on behalf of opposite party pleaded therein that opposite party did not commit any deficiency in service and did not commit any unfair trade practice. It is pleaded that complainant has violated the terms and conditions of insurance policy and claim was repudiated in accordance with law on dated 12.06.2012. It is further pleaded that vehicle was driven without Registration Certificate and route permit. It is further pleaded that complainant has no cause of action to file complaint against opposite party. It is pleaded that surveyor was appointed and surveyor submitted the report. Prayer for dismissal of complaint sought.
4. Learned District Forum dismissed the complaint filed by complainant. Feeling aggrieved against order passed by learned District Forum appellant filed present appeal before State Commission.
5. We have heard learned advocates appearing on behalf of parties and we have also perused entire record carefully.
6. Following points arises for determination in present appeal.
1. Whether complaint (Allegation in writing made) by complainant under section 12 of Consumer 3 Preet Pal Versus The United India Insurance Company Ltd.
(F.A. No.357/2016) Protection Act 1986 can be treated as evidence of complainant under section 13(4) of Consumer Protection Act 1986 for adjudication of controversial facts relating to consumer dispute.
2. Final order.
Findings upon point No.1 with reasons:
7. After perusal of contents of complaint and after perusal of version filed by opposite party learned District Forum listed the case for complainant's evidence on 21.10.2013, 28.10.2013, 12.12.2013, 26.02.2014, 26.04.2014, 26.06.2014 and 29.08.2014. On 29.08.2014 complainant did not adduce any evidence by way of affidavit and learned Advocate appearing on behalf of complainant had given written statement before learned District Forum that complaint alongwith documents annexure-C1 to C6 already filed be read in evidence and closed the evidence.
8. Opposite party filed affidavit of Shri Vijay Kumar Berry Surveyor by way of evidence. There is recital in affidavit that deponent inspected the damaged vehicle at M/s. Peo Auto Reckong Peo and conducted inspection of vehicle and found that said vehicle was damaged in the accident and assess genuine claim as per condition of vehicle. There is further recital in affidavit that deponent prepared final survey report Annexure-R8 as per terms and conditions of insurance policy.
4
Preet Pal Versus The United India Insurance Company Ltd.
(F.A. No.357/2016)
9. Opposite party also adduced evidence of Pankaj Sharma Surveyor and loss assessor by way of affidavit. There is recital in affidavit that deponent re-inspected damaged vehicle at M/s. Peo Auto Reckong Peo District Kinnaur and conducted thorough inspection of the accidental vehicle and submitted re-inspection report as per factual position vide Annexure-R9 as per terms and conditions of insurance policy.
10. Opposite party also tender in evidence affidavit of Shri Ravinder Negi. There is recital in affidavit that version and document filed alongwith version were drafted as per instruction of deponent. There is recital in affidavit that para No.1 to 8 of version filed by opposite party be treated as evidence and annexure-R1 to R7 may also be treated as evidence. State Commission is of the opinion that party can adduce evidence relating to adjudication of controversial facts under section 13(4) of Consumer Protection Act 1986 relating to consumer dispute. State Commission is also of the opinion that complaint filed by complainant is defined under section 2(c) of Consumer Protection Act 1986 as any allegation in writing made by complainant.
11. It is held that complaint and version filed by parties are only pleadings of the parties and cannot be treated as evidence of parties under section 13(4) of Consumer Protection Act 1986 for adjudication of controversial facts inter se parties. It is held that complaint and version filed 5 Preet Pal Versus The United India Insurance Company Ltd.
(F.A. No.357/2016) under Consumer Protection Act 1986 and evidence of the parties under section 13(4) of Consumer Protection Act 1986 relating to proof of controversial facts under Consumer Protection Act 1986 are entirely two different concepts. It is held that evidence is sought by learned District Forum from parties under section 13(4) of Consumer Protection Act 1986 where opposite party denies or disputes the allegation contained in complaint in version. In the present case opposite party has denied and disputed the allegation leveled by complainant in complaint in version. It is held that complainant was under legal obligation to adduce evidence relating to controversial facts under section 13(4) of Consumer Protection Act 1986.
12. In the present case learned Advocate appearing on behalf of complainant on dated 29.08.2014 had given statement that complaint be treated as evidence of the complainant under section 13(4) of Consumer Protection Act 1986 and learned District Forum has admitted complaint filed by complainant as evidence under section 13(4) of Consumer Protection Act 1986.
13. It is held that learned District Forum has committed procedural material irregularity by way of admitting complaint filed by complainant under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act 1986 as evidence under section 13(4) of Consumer Protection Act 1986 for adjudication of 6 Preet Pal Versus The United India Insurance Company Ltd.
(F.A. No.357/2016) controversial facts relating to consumer dispute. State Commission is of the opinion that it is not expedient to dispose of appeal on merits unless procedural material irregularity committed by learned District Forum is rectified in the ends of justice and on the principle of natural justice. Point No.1 is decided accordingly.
Point No.2: Final Order
14. In view of findings upon point No.1 above order of learned District Forum Shimla dated 05.08.2016 announced in consumer complaint No.62/2013 title Preet Pal versus United India Insurance Company Ltd. is set aside and complaint is remanded back to learned District Forum Shimla with order to receive the affirmative and rebuttal evidence of complainant by way of affidavits strictly as per provisions of section 13(4) of Consumer Protection Act 1986 relating to adjudication of controversial facts inter se parties. It is further ordered that learned District Forum will give opportunity to adduce rebuttal evidence by way of affidavits if any to opposite party. Thereafter learned District Forum will dispose of complaint afresh in accordance with law within three months. Statement of learned Advocate appeared on behalf of complainant dated 25.08.2014 will form part & parcel of order. Parties are directed to appear before learned District Forum Shimla on 09.05.2017. Parties are left to bear 7 Preet Pal Versus The United India Insurance Company Ltd.
(F.A. No.357/2016) their own litigation costs before State Commission. File of learned District Forum alongwith certified copy of order be sent back forthwith and file of State Commission be consigned to record room after due completion forthwith. Certified copy of order be transmitted to parties forthwith free of costs strictly as per rules. Appeal is disposed of. Pending application(s) if any also disposed of.
Justice P.S. Rana (R) President Vijay Pal Khachi Member Meena Verma Member 01.05.2017.
KD} 8