STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PUNJAB, CHANDIGARH.

Date of institution : 23.02.2023 Reserved on : 18.02.2025 Date of Decision : 28.02.2025 Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd., 108, Surya Tower, 7^th Floor, Mall Road, Ludhiana through its Manager, Mr. Suryadeep Singh Thakur, Area Manager Legal Claims, Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd., SCO 57-58-59, Sector 17-A, Chandigarh ….Appellant/Opposite Parties Versus Gurwant Singh (now deceased) through his Legal Representatives :-

1. Paramjit Kaur w/o Gurwant Singh

2. Shamsher Singh s/o Gurwant Singh

3. Sukhdarshan Singh s/o Gurwant Singh All of above residents of House No. 5954, Street No. 4½, Gobind Nagar Millarganj, Ludhiana-141003 .…Respondents/Complainants First Appeal under Section 41 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the order dated 08.09.2022 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kapurthala, Camp Court at Ludhiana in RBT Complaint No. 207 of 2016.

Quorum:-

Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Daya Chaudhary, President Ms. Simarjot Kaur, Member Mr. Vishav Kant Garg, Member

1) Whether Reporters of the Newspapers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes/No

2) To be referred to the Reporters or not? Yes/No 3) Whether judgment should be reported in the Digest? Yes/No Present:-

For the appellant : Sh. Sachin Ohri, Advocate For the respondent : None VISHAV KANT GARG, MEMBER :

Briefly the Complainant-Gurwant Singh earlier filed Consumer Complaint No. 105 of 2012, which was dismissed vide its order dated 08.07.2014 by the District Commission. Said order was challenged by the Complainant in the Appeal before this Commission. Vide order dated 03.09.2015, said order dated 08.07.2014 was set aside and remanded the case to the District Forum (now Commission) by passing the following directions :-

“9. In view of the above circumstances, we accept the appeal, impugned order is set-aside. The complaint is remanded back to the District Forum with the directions that the Complainant be allowed the additional evidence by way of examination of concerned Clerk of DTO, Mathura to prove which report is correct and whether the licence in the name of Bhajan Singh is genuine or not. The parties or their counsel be appeared before the District Forum on 28.10.2015.”

2. Thereafter, the District Commission, Kapurthala (Camp Court at Ludhiana) entered the case vide RBT/Complaint No. 207 of 2016. Said Complaint was decided by the District Commission vide its order dated

08.09.2022 by partly allowing the Complaint.

3. Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd. i.e. Appellant/Opposite Parties through the Area Manager (Legal Claims) had filed the present Appeal and challenged the impugned order dated

08.09.2022 before this Commission.

4. For the sake of convenience, it would be apposite to mention here that hereinafter the parties will be referred, as were arrayed before the District Commission in the Complaint.

5. Brief facts of the case are that the Complainant being the owner of Tata Indica Model 2007 had purchased the insurance cover No. 109001190347 for the said vehicle from the OPs by paying Rs.6,933/- as premium. Said vehicle was insured for a sum of Rs.2,40,000/- and the period of insurance was w.e.f. 28.12.2009 to 27.12.2010. Said vehicle, while driving by Bhajan Singh, Driver, met with an accident on 03.07.2010 and it was badly damaged. OPs were informed about the accident, who had appointed Sh. B.K. Bansal, Surveyor for investigating the accident. Said Surveyor had assessed the loss of Rs.1,75,000/- and suggested the damage as ‘total loss basis’. The claim had been consulted between the parties and the loss amount was settled as Rs.95,000/-. The Complainant had given his consent dated 12.11.2010 to settle the claim on ‘Net of Salvage/Cash less basis’ but the OPs had not paid Rs.95,000/- to him as settlement amount. The Complainant had sold the said vehicle for Rs.80,000/- on the advice of the Surveyor. On the asking of the OPs, the Complainant had also submitted the verification report f