2025 Supreme(Online)(SCDRC) 9961
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
M/S NORBU THE MONTANNA – Appellant
Versus
BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED – Respondent
SC/4/A/111/2024
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION CHANDIGARH FIRST APPEAL NO. SC/4/A/111/2024 M/S NORBU THE MONTANNA PRESENT ADDRESS - S.C.O. NO. 143-144, MADHYA MARG, SECTOR 8-C, CHANDIGARH-
160009 ,CHANDIGARH.
.......Appellant(s)
Versus BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED PRESENT ADDRESS - BAJAJ ALLIANZ HOUSE, AIRPORT ROAD, YEWADA, PUNE-411006. ,CHANDIGARH.
BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED PRESENT ADDRESS - SCO 156- 159, 2ND FLOOR, SECTOR 9-C, CHANDIGARH 160009 ,CHANDIGARH.
RAKESH HANDA PRESENT ADDRESS - SCO 156-159, 2ND FLOOR, SECTOR 9-C, CHANDIGARH 160009 ,CHANDIGARH.
PORTECH INSURANCE SURVEYORS & LOSS ASSESSORS PRESENT ADDRESS - 1334 , BASEMENT, SECTOR 80, MOHALI-160062 ,CHANDIGARH.
.......Respondent(s)
BEFORE:
HON'BLE MRS. PADMA PANDEY , PRESIDING MEMBER HON'BLE MR. PREETINDER SINGH , MEMBER FOR THE APPELLANT:
M/S NORBU THE MONTANNA DATED: 10/03/2025
ORDER
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, U.T. CHANDIGARH [Additional Bench]
==================
Appeal No. : A/111/2024 Date of Institution : 12/03/2024 Date of Decision : 10/03/2025 M/s Norbu The Montanna , Upmhoal Lahesar, P.C. Yoli Hadwest No. 494/2, Dharmsala, Kangra, Himachal Pradesh, Corporate Office at SCO No. 143-144, Madhya Marg, Sector 8-c, Chandigarh – 160009, through its Sole Proprietor – Ms.
Nainee Garg. ….Appellant Vs.
1. Regd. Office at Bajaj Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Ltd., Allianz House, Airport Road, Yewada, Pune – 411006, through its Managing Director.
2. Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Ltd., SCO 156-159, 2 nd Floor, Sector 9-C, Chandigarh – 160009, through its Manager.
3. Rakesh Handa, Insurance Agent, Agency Code – 10009008, through Manager, Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Ltd., SCO 156-159, 2 nd Floor, Sector 9-C, Chandigarh – 160009.
4. #1334 (Basement), Sector Portech Insurance Surveyors & Loss Assessors, 80, Mohali – 160062, through its Authorized Representative Pukhraj Singh.
…. Respondents BEFORE: MRS. PADMA PANDEY PRESIDING MEMBER PREETINDER SINGH MEMBER PRESENT : Sh. Savinder Singh Gill along with Sh. Sh. Hoshiar Chand, Advocates for the Appellant.
Sh. Sandeep Suri, Advocate for the Respondents.
PER PADMA PANDEY, PRESIDING MEMBER The present appeal has been filed by the Appellant impugning the order
1.
dated 11.01.2024 vide which the Learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I, U.T. Chandigarh (for brevity hereinafter to be referred as “the Ld.
District Commission”), dismissed the Consumer Complaint bearing no.CC/829/2020, in the following terms:-
“9. In view of the foregoings, we are of the firm opinion that this Commission has no jurisdiction to try & adjudicate the complaint. Therefore, complaint stands dismissed, with no order as to costs. However, the complainant is at liberty to approach any appropriate court of competent jurisdiction for redressal of his grievance.
10. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stands disposed off.”
2. For the convenience, the parties are being referred to, in the instant Appeal, as position held in Consumer Complaint before the Ld. District Commission.
3. Before the Ld. District Commission, it was the case of the Complainant that, she got her under construction Hotel/Property insured from Opposite Parties No.1 & 2 for a sum of (cid:0) 12,00,00,000/- with super structure building being insured for (cid:0)10,00,00,000/- and foundation for (cid:0) 2,00,00,000/- by paying premium amount of (cid:0)1,11,510/-. The insurance was valid from 18.09.2019 to 17.09.2020. In December 2019, due to harsh weather conditions, one of the retaining wall of the under construction property as well as the water body on the roof of the building got heavily damaged. The complainant immediately intimated Opposite Parties No.2 & 3 about the incident and also sent photographs of the site to Opposite Party No.3 on 14.12.2019. Thereafter, Opposite Parties No.1 & 2 appointed Opposite Party No.4 as Surveyor to assess the damage caused to the property of the Complainant. Accordingly,