ORDER :

Sunita Sharma, (Presiding Member)

1. The present complaint has been filed under Section 17 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 seeking directions to the opposite party to pay sum of Rs. 20,00,000 along with interest @ 9% per annum, further sum of Rs. 50,000 as compensation and costs.

2. The facts necessary for adjudication of this complaint, as averred in the complaint, are That complainant is registered owner of vehicle (Tipper Truck) bearing registration No. HPI7E-2209, which was insured with the opposite party w.e.f. 20.5.2017 to 19.5.2018 for a sum of Rs. 20,28.250 on IDV basis. It is further pleaded that the said vehicle was purchased by the complainant for earning his livelihood by way of self employment. It is further pleaded that on 12.9.2017 the truck was extensively damaged when it was on its way to Cheog from Gojar, when at place Jong due to rock sliding from upward side of road and truck went off road into tons river. The incident was reported to the police and intimation in this regard was also given to Insurance Company. The Insurance Company appointed surveyor-cum-loss assessor. All the necessary documents were submitted to the Insurance Company as well as to Surveyor. Thereafter, complainant sent various representations to opposite party, but opposite party did not settle the claim of the complainant. It is further pleaded that Insurance Company committed deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.

3. Upon notice, the opposite party put in appearance and filed its written version in which took preliminary objections to the effect that the complainant is not a consumer, that this complaint is pre-matur and that complaint is bad for non-joinder of necessary parties. On merits, the OP has admitted that the vehicle in question was insured for a sum of Rs. 20,28,250 on IDV basis. It is further admitted that on receipt of intimation regarding accident, the opposite party appointed surveyor to conduct spot survey of the vehicle in question on 14.9.2017 who submitted his report dated 9.10.2017. It is pleaded after receipt of surveyor report, the Insurance Company appointed Investigator to conduct final survey of the vehicle in question and also to investigate the claim of the complainant. The said investigator asked the complainant to supply certain documents, but the complainant instead of supplying the said documents filed the present complaint which is premature as opposite party neither repudiated the claim of the complainant nor closed the file of complainant as no claim. It is further pleaded that driver of the vehicle in question was not authorized to drive the HTV as the vehicle in question is heavy goods vehicle. It is further pleaded that complainant is himself responsible for non-settlement of claim as he has not submitted the requisite documents, which are necessary for settlement of claim. There is no deficiency in service and unfair practice on the part of the opposite party and as such this complaint is devoid of any merit.

4. The complainant has filed rejoinder in which he denied the pleadings of the opposite party and reaffirmed the averments made by him in his complaint.

5. The parties have lead oral as well as documentary evidence in support of their respective cases.

6. We have given thoughtful consideration to the arguments advanced by learned Counsel for the parties and we have also examined the record of the case carefully.

7. The complainant filed his affidavit by way of evidence and Affidavit of Sh. Manjeet Singh, driver of the vehicle and affidavit of Cleaner Sh. Shoor Veer Exs C-1 to C-3 respectably and also filed documents C-1 to C-10. It is clear from these documents that the information regarding accident was given to the insurance Company/Opposite party on 20.9.2017 which was duly received by them. It is also evident from the documents that documents relating to accident and vehicle in question were also submitted to the respondent Company well in time. It is evident from C-10 that