STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION PUNJAB, DAKSHIN MARG, SECTOR 37-A, CHANDIGARH.

Date of Institution : 08.11.2024 Date of Reserve : 16.07.2025 Date of Decision : 06.08.2025 Baldev Singh Bhatti aged about 50 years, son of S.Dharam Singh, R/o H.No.428, VPO Lohat Baddi, Raikot, District Ludhiana, C/o # 295, Village Saikandarpura, Malerkotla. (Aadhaar Card No.8455 3243

4020).

…..Appellant/Complainant Versus United India Insurance Company Limited, Branch Office, above Bank of Baroda, Thandi Sarak, Malerkotla through its Branch Manager.

……..Respondent/Opposite Party Appeal under Section 41 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 to challenge the order dated 13.06.2024 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Malerkotla in RBT/CC.No.139 of 2023.

Quorum :-

Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Daya Chaudhary, President Ms. Simarjot Kaur, 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.Sparsh Chhibber, Advocate For the respondent : Sh.Ravinder Arora, Advocate for Sh.Neeraj Khanna, Advocate SIMARJOT KAUR, MEMBER :-

The Appellant/Complainant has filed the present Appeal under Section 41 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, (in short the ‘Act’) for setting aside the order dated 13.06.2024 of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Malerkotla whereby the Complaint filed by the Complainant had been dismissed.

2. It would be apposite to mention that hereinafter the parties will be referred, as were arrayed before the District Commission.

3. Briefly, the facts of the case as made out in the Complaint before the District Commission are that the Complainant had purchased one Tata Prima LX 3125 K8X4 BS-IV with Registration No.PB-13 BB 7045. It was Goods Carrier. Said vehicle was financed with OP vide policy No.201904043119P115592119 w.e.f. 04.03.2020 to 03.03.2021. The Complainant had paid an amount of Rs.61,984/- as premium for the said policy for the insured declared value of Rs.35,00,000/-. Unfortunately the vehicle of the Complainant had collided with another vehicle as a stray cattle came in front of the vehicle on 02.10.2020. The vehicle of the Complainant was damaged in the said accident. The matter was reported to the Police Station Garshankar. DD No.23 dated 02.10.2020 was lodged. Compromise had been effected between both the parties, who had suffered during the accident. There was no negligence on the part of either of the drivers of both the vehicles. It was mentioned in the Complaint that intimation with regard to the accident was sent to the OP on

05.10.2020. On receipt of intimation, the claim was registered with the OPs vide claim Registration No.2019043120C05023001. OP had appointed Surveyor to assess the loss of the vehicle of the Complainant. He had supplied all the requisite documents to the OP. He had received a letter dated 16.04.2021 from the OP vide which the claim of the Complainant was declared as No Claim by the competent authority due to 21.9% overloaded vehicle at the time of accident. The gross weight of the vehicle was 31000 and unladen weight of the vehicle was 14800. At the time of accident the vehicle of the Complainant was carrying load within permissible limits i.e. 300 CFT as per the Tax Invoice dated 02.10.2020. It was averred that it had been clearly mentioned in the tax invoice that the vehicle was carrying weight as per the capacity passed by the relevant authority. The Complainant had approached OP for release of Insurance Claim but they had refused to do so. The act of OP tantamounts to be a case of ‘deficiency in service’ and ‘unfair trade practice’. Hence, the Complaint was filed by the Complainant by seeking directions to be issued to the OP to pay an amount of Rs.13,00,000/- being the Insurance amount of the damaged vehicle along with interest @ 18% per annum till its realization. OP be also directed to