- (1.) THIS complaint under Section 17 r/w Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 , has been filed praying that compensation of Rs. 16,00,000/ - be awarded against opposite party.
(2.) THE complainant averred that he is the owner of Bus No. MP 26 C -5795. He had purchased the bus chassis for a consideration of Rs. 4,83,526.59 p. and the complainant spent Rs. 4,15,000/ - in the fabrication of bus body. It was further averred that the bus was purchased on finance from opposite party (for short O.P.) No. 2 for which complainant paid margin money of Rs. 1,00,426.59 p. to O.P. No. 2. The said bus was insured with O.P. No. 1 on 1.7.1999 covering the risk for the period from 1.7.1999 to 30.6.2000. According to the averments of the complainant besides margin money as above, the complainant also paid monthly instalments towards money obtained on finance for the bus chassis, totalling Rs. 1,62,866/ - till 27.4.2000. He however, due to personal difficulties could not pay the instalments for the months of May, 2000 to July, 2000.
(3.) IT was further averred by the complainant that the said bus met with an accident on 20.8.1999 which resulted in total body loss of the bus. The report of the accident was given by the complainant to the opposite parties. O.P. No. 1 appointed Surveyor who assessed the loss. It is further averred by the complainant that O.P. No. 1 did not pay any amount to the complainant. The averment of the complainant further was that reconstruction of the bus required Rs. 4,00,000/ -. Therefore, the complainant requested respondent/O.P. No. 2 to refinance further amount of Rs. 1,50,000/ - for the reconstruction of the body. However, the said finance was not made available by O.P. No. 2. Since the cost of reconstruction of the bus body was high and beyond the capacity of the complainant, the complainant desired that instead of the bus the same be converted into a truck which would require lesser amount. However, as this could be done only with the consent of the O.P. He, therefore, sought their consent, which however was not accorded to the complainant. The averment of complainant further is that he has paid total amount of Rs. 2,63,392.59 p. to O.P. No. 2 as against the bus chassis finance of Rs. 3,83,000/ -. It was further averred that the bus was insured with the insurer for Rs. 8,50,000/ -, and according to the assessment of the Insurance Company, the cost of body is Rs. 3,66,573.41 p. and he should have been paid the above amount as compensation. The opposite party No. 1 insurer committed deficiency in service by not paying compensation. It was averred by the complainant that as opposite party No. 2, finance company did not refinance the complainant and also did not allow the complainant to convert the bus into truck and did not take steps to enable the complainant to carry out the business of transport, therefore, O.P. No. 2 also committed deficiency in service. The complainant claimed total compensation of Rs. 16,00,000/ - as detailed by him in the complaint, from the opposite parties.;