SAKET MUKKAR S/O SH. SULTAN SINGH, R/O VPO NANGAL CHAUDHARY, TEHSIL NARNAUL, DISTRICT : MAHENDERGARH HARYANA Vs. CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER, RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. 19 RELIANCE CENTER WACHAND HIRACHAND MATG, BAIARD EASTATE, MUMBAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The complainant, Saket Mukkar has filed this revision petition under Sec. 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, challenging the order dated 12.12.2013, passed by the Haryana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Panchkula (hereinafter referred as ‘State Commission’), vide which, while dismissing Appeal No.888 of 2013, filed by the complainant, the order passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum on 8.10.2013, allowing Consumer Complaint No.30 of 2012, was upheld.

(2.) The factual matrix of the case states that the complainant/petitioner, Saket Mukkar insured his Mahindra vehicle, bearing registration No.HR - 66 - 6906 with the opposite party (OP), Reliance General Insurance Company for the period from 10.3.2011 to 9.3.2012. The said vehicle met with an accident on 7.6.2011, while going from Narnaul to Nangal Chaudhary and an intimation about the accident was given to the insurance company, which appointed a surveyor to assess the loss. The vehicle was taken to an authorised Mahindra Service Centre, Sri Mohan Motors at Narnaul. It is stated by the complainant that the vehicle was inspected by the surveyor at the said workshop and the surveyor assured him that all expenses incurred at the workshop shall be paid by the insurance company. The vehicle remained at the workshop for repairs from 7.6.2011 to 19.6.2011. After the repairs, Sri Mohan Motors, Narnaul raised a bill of Rs.1,01,027/- and the said amount was paid by the complainant. However, despite contacting the surveyor and the OP insurance company many times, the bill was not paid for a long time. Ultimately, after a long delay, a cheque of Rs.55,378.00 dated 29.9.2011 drawn on HDFC Bank was received by the complainant from the OP company. As per the complainant, he sent e - mail to the insurance company, expressing his dissatisfaction with the services given by them. He also sent a legal notice to the OP insurance company, but there was no response from them. The complainant filed the consumer complaint in question, seeking directions to the insurance company for payment of remaining sum of Rs.46,649.00 with interest @ 18% per annum and compensation of Rs.1 lakh on account of harassment and Rs.35,000.00 as litigation charges.

(3.) The complaint was resisted by the OP insurance company by filing a written reply before the District Forum, in which they stated that they had already made payment of Rs.55,378.00 in accordance with the report submitted by the surveyor. The OP company stated that the report of the surveyor could not be brushed aside lightly. There was no deficiency in service on their part and it was wrong to say that the surveyor had given any assurance to the complainant for making payment of the full amount.