UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY Vs. DINESH VIJAY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Revision Petition No. 698 of 2015 filed by Opposite Party challenges the impugned order dated 19.12.2014 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Jaipur, Rajasthan ('State Commission', for short) in appeal No. 958/2012. Vide this order, the appeal against the order dated 18.06.2012 in CC 967/2008 of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Jaipur (District Forum) was dismissed.

(2.) Brief facts are that the complainant, Shri Dinesh Vijay, had insured his vehicle, a Lancer (RJ-14-6C-5377), with the petitioner/Opposite Party- UII co. Ltd. ( OP hereafter) for the period, 15.05.2006 to 14.05.2007, for a sum insured of Rs.5,00,000/- (policy no. 140300/31/06/01/0000/1086; premium- Rs.16,680/-). On 08.11.2006 at 2.30 p.m., the vehicle, while avoiding a collision with an oncoming vehicle, rolled down the road, overturned, suffered damage, particularly to the body shell. OP was intimated and a surveyor was appointed. The plaint is that the surveyor assessed the loss at Rs.2,31,918/ on the basis that repair of the body shell was also possible. However, the body shell was not repairable and would itself cost Rs.5,35,000/- to replace, as per M/s. Autolife, the authorized repairer (per the complainant). The insurance claim was declined vise OP's letter dated 20.06.2007 as "NO CLAIM" as despite repeated reminders, complainant had not submitted the required documents. So, a consumer complaint, CC 967/2008, was filed with the District Forum, seeking payment of (i) sum insured of Rs. 5 lakh, with 12% from date of filing of claim; (ii) Rs. 50,000/- for mental agony, and (iii) Rs. 21,000/- as cost of litigation.

(3.) No written reply to the complaint was filed by the OP. However, the OP was represented by a counsel before the District Forum and arguments were heard. After considering pleadings and evidence, the District Forum, concluding that the OP, in not settling the claim, had been deficient in service, partly allowed the complaint, vide it's order dated 18.6.2012, relevant portion of which is as under :-