IN THE DELHI STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION Date of Institution : 09.02.2018 Date of Reserving the order : 22.08.2024 Date of Decision : 15.05.2025 C No. 148/2018 IN THE MATTER OF Ms Sunita Devi A-36, Sarai Peepal Thala Extn.

Adarsh Nagar Delhi- 110033 (Through: Mr. Tarumesh Kumar, Advocate)

..…Complainant VERSUS Iffco-Tokio General Insurance Co. Ltd.

Through its Director Unit No. A & B-4, Third Floor, TDI center Jasaola,New Delhi-110001 Also at:-

Iffco Sadan, C-1, District Center, Saket, New Delhi-110017 (Through: Mr. Suyash Vyas, Advocate)

.....Opposite Party HON’BLE MS. PINKI, MEMBER (JUDICIAL)

HON’BLE MS. BIMLA KUMARI, MEMBER (FEMALE)

1. Whether reporters of local newspapers be allowed to see the judgment?

Yes

2. To be referred to the reporters or not?

Yes Present: None for the complainant.

None for the opposite party MS. BIMLA KUMARI, MEMBER (FEMALE)

ORDER

1. The complainant Ms Sunita Devi initially filed the complaint bearing no. 367/15 before Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum VII, South-West, Local Shopping Centre, Sheikh Sarai, Phase II, New Delhi on 12.07.2017 against the opposite party.

2. Notice of the complaint was issued by the District Forum to the opposite party, which filed reply to the complaint. The opposite party also filed an application for dismissal of the complaint on account of pecuniary jurisdiction.

3. Since the Learned District Forum was not having the pecuniary jurisdiction, the complaint was returned by Ld District Forum on 01.02.2018 along with the pleadings with directions to the parties to appear before the State commission on 22.02.2018 at 10 30 A.M. The complaint was filed by the complainant in this commission on 09.02.2018.

4. Brief facts of the case are that the complainant is owner of a vehicle having Registration no. DL3CBV2817 make Skoda Superb 1.8 TSI 2011. The vehicle was duly insured with the opposite party vide policy no. 96624388 which was valid with effect from 18.02.2016 to 17.02.2017. The insured declared value of the car as per Insurance policy was Rs18,00,000/- and the complainant paid the premium of Rs 54205.89.

5. It is the case of the complainant that the car was stolen on the intervening night of 28/29.09.2016 from narela. The complainant informed the police and E-FIR bearing no.028618/2016 was registered U/s 379 IPC at E-Police Station- M.V. Theft, Distt. Crime Branch, Delhi. Later on, the Police submitted the untraced report in respect of the vehicle in the court of Learned ACMM Rohini, which was accepted on 05.11.2016. The complainant also informed about the theft of the car to the opposite party vide claim no.36790397 upon which the opposite party appointed the surveyor to assess the loss. The complainant provided all the documents as and when the same were asked by the opposite party. However, the surveyor appointed by the opposite party started harassing the complainant on one pretext or other. He used to behave rudely and offensively and also made pressure upon the complainant to compromise the matter. The brother of complainant gave a written request on 06.12.2016 to the opposite party for the change of the surveyor but despite the assurance of the opposite party the surveyor was not changed.

6. It is the further case of the complainant that she received a letter dated 20.04.2017 from the opposite party which offered a similar vehicle towards the full and final settlement of the claim and did not give the IDV Of the vehicle to her. Due to the deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party, the complainant and her brother suffered harassment and mental agony. Thereafter, the complainant sent a legal notice dated 31.05.2017 but the opposite party did not respond to that legal notice.

7. The complainant has prayed that directions be given to the opposite party to pay the price/insured declared value of the vehicle i.e. Rs 18,00,000/- with interest @15 percent Per Annum and Rs 50,000/- incurred by the complainant to arrange the alternate transport and compensatio