LAWYER NOTICE.

FROM:P.L. Pavan Kumar B.com., B.L.

Advocate,
Near:- C.S.R Sarma College,
Seetharampuram,
Ongole,
Prakasam district.
To:National insurance company Ltd,
Tata pcbu, Department of Motor Tieup business,
Royal Churchgate Mumbai,
Maharashtra-4000038.
Under the instructions of my client Mr. Shaik Mahabbob Saheb S/o MR Rahamathulla,
H No 1-153-F-A, 1st ward, Markapur,Prakasam District., I hereby issue the following notice
for your immediate compliance:That my client purchased the vehicle of Tata motors Sumo Ambulance in the year of
2013 and vehicle bearing No AP9TR3533. The said vehicle was insured with your company
with policy No 2533101200072330 dt 06-03-2013. The vehicle insurance was in force from
06-03-2103 to 05-03-2014. On 05-04-2013 the said vehicle met with an accident near
sivapuram Village, Markapur Road, Vinukonda, Guntur District and vehicle fully damaged.
My client got repair to his vehicle in exclusive show room Tata Motors, Guntur. That my
client spent of Rs 2,00,000/- nearly and bills was issued by the said show room of Rs
1,65,744-00/-. The said show room bills sent to you. But your company settled claim
amount only of Rs 83,724/-. You are not entitled to do so. My client number of times
requested you for settlement the remaining claim amount but you did not respond properly.
After one month purchase of the vehicle, the vehicle met with an accident. You have no
right to decrease claim amount because of new vehicle and not to take deprecation on new
vehicle. As you given huge claim amount to my client, my client has much loss. You did not
proper verification the damage vehicle and estimation of the damage vehicle. My client has
loss of Rs 1,65,744/- as vehicle got repair. But surveyor estimated the loss as Rs 87,724/-.
The reasons given by the surveyor are not sound and also not on any basis. The surveyor
wrongly estimated the damage and loss suffered by client is as 87,724/- as against Rs
1,65,744/-. There is no any reason why your company settled the less claim amount to my
client. You are not given any valid reason to my client regarding to settle the less claim
amount.
Hence you are hereby called upon to settle the claim amount which was spent by client and
as per valid show room receipt within 15 days, from the date of receipt of this notice. Failing
which my client would be forced to initiate legal proceedings before appropriate forum to
redress his grievances and the price to be incurred by my client for settlement the claim
amount against you in which case you would be also held liable for costs, compensation and
other reliefs under law there under.

Note:-

Here with enclose the Xerox copy of the receipts.

Ongole,
Date:- 06-02-2014.

ADVOCATE

IN THE COURT OF THE DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM: ONGOLE.

CC NO

2014

Between:Shaik Mahabbob Saheb

S/o MR Rahamathulla,
R/o H No 1-153-F-A,
1st ward, Markapur,
Prakasam District

Complainant
VS

National insurance company Ltd,

Tata pcbu, Department of Motor Tieup business,
Royal Churchgate Mumbai,
Maharashtra-4000038.

Opposite party

COMPLAINANT FILED ON BEHALF OF THE COMPLAINANT UNDER

SECTION 12 OF CONSUMER PROTUCTION ACT-1986
DISCRIPTION OF THE COMPLAINANT:The complainant is son of the MR Rahamathulla aged about

years, Muslim,

driver, Resident of H No 1-153-F-A, 1 st ward, Markapur Mandal, Prakasam

District.
DISCRIPTION OF THE OPPOSITE PARTY:The opposite party is National insurance company Ltd,Tata pcbu,
Department of Motor Tieup business,Royal Churchgate Mumbai,Maharashtra4000038.
Brief facts of the case:It is humbly submitted that the complainant is residing in Markapur Mandal,
Prakasam District and he has been doing as driver. That the complainant
purchased the vehicle of Tata motors Sumo Ambulance through
Markapur Tata show room and got insurance to his Vehicle through
Markapur Tata show room in the year of 2013 and vehicle bearing
No AP 27 TW 4541. The said Xerox copy of C- book is filed herewith as
document No.1. The said vehicle was insured with the opposite party policy
bearing No 2533101200072330 dt 06-03-2013. The vehicle insurance is in
force from 06-03-2103 to 05-03-2014. The Xerox copy of insurance policy
copy is filed herewith as document No 2. On 05-04-2013 the said vehicle
met with an accident near sivapuram Village, Markapur Road, Vinukonda,
Guntur District and vehicle fully damaged. After one month the vehicle
purchased, the vehicle met with an accident and fully damaged. The
complainant got repair to his vehicle in exclusive show room Tata Motors,
Guntur. That the complainant spent of Rs 2,00,000/- nearly and bills was

issued by the said show room of Rs 1,65,744-00/-. The said bunches of bills
are filed herewith as document No3. The said show room bills sent to the
opposite party. But the opposite party settled claim amount only of Rs
82,018/-. The said receipts are filed herewith as document No.4.

The

opposite party is not entitled to do so. The complainant number of times

requested the opposite party for settlement the remaining claim amount but
the opposite party did not respond properly. After one month purchase of the
vehicle, the vehicle met with an accident. The opposite party has no right to
decrease claim amount because of new vehicle and not to take deprecation
on new vehicle.
It is humbly submitted that as the opposite party given huge claim
amount to the complainant, the complainant has much loss. The opposite
party did not proper verification the damage vehicle and estimation of the
damage vehicle. The complainant has loss of Rs 1,65,744/- as vehicle met
with accident. But surveyor estimated the loss as Rs 82,018/-. The reasons
given by the surveyor are not sound and also not on any basis. The surveyor
wrongly estimated the damage and loss suffered by complainant is as
82,018/- as against Rs 1,65,744/-. There is no any reason why the opposite
party settled the less claim amount to the complainant. The opposite party
are are not given any valid reason to the complainant regarding to settle the
less claim amount.
It is humbly submitted that the complainant got issued legal notice to
the opposite party to settle the claim amount on 06-02-2013. The said legal
notice is herewith filed as document No 5. The opposite party gave reply
with false allegations dt 03-04-2014. The said reply copy is herewith filed as
document No 6.
It is further submitted that it is the burden duty of the opposite party
to protect and do better services to its customer and also render fair
services in a proper way to the customers, when the customers obtained
policy from the opposite party.
There is deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party in not
settle the claim amount to the complainant.

The complaint is entitled for

compensation from the opposite party.

There is consumer relationship between the complainant and the
opposite party. There is also deficiency of service on the part of the opposite
party. The transaction has taken place at Markapur within the jurisdiction of
this Honble Forum.
As there is no other goes to resolve his grievances, the complainant
approached this Honble Forum for Justice.

Hence, this complaint.

PRAYER:
The complainant therefore prays the Honorable Forum to consider the
above facts and allow the complaint and
1)

To direct the opposite parties to settle the

remaining the claim amount of Rs 1,00,000/with 12% within time.

2)

Also direct the opposite parties to pay the

compensation

of

Rs

50,000/-

along

with

interest of 9% towards mental agony.

3)

and award

Rs.5,000 /- towards costs of the

petition and pass such other appropriate orders

in the

interest of justice.
Be pleased to consider.

Advocate for the Complainant

COMPLAINANT

The facts stated above are true to the best of my knowledge,

information and belief.
Ongole
Date :-

COMPLAINANT

LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE COMPLAINANT

1.
2.
3.
4.

The
The
The
The

Xerox copy of C-book.

Xerox copy of insurance copy.
bunch of original bills.
receipts of Rs 82,018 which was settled by the opposite party to

the complainant.
5. The legal notice dt 06-02-2013.
6. The reply copy dt 04-03-2014.
Advocate for complainant.

IN THE COURT OF THE DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM: ONGOLE.

CC NO

2014

Between:Shaik Mahabbob Saheb

S/o MR Rahamathulla, H No 1-153-F-A,
1st ward, Markapur,
Prakasam District

Complainant
VS

National insurance company Ltd,

Tata pcbu, Department of Motor Tieup business,
Royal Churchgate Mumbai,
Maharashtra-4000038.

Opposite party

AFFIDAVIT FILED UNDER SECTION 139 OF C.P.C.

I Shaik Mahabbob Saheb S/o MR Rahamathulla, aged about

years,

Muslim, H No 1-153-F-A, 1st ward, Markapur, Prakasam District., do hereby

solemnly affirm state on oath as follows:It is humbly submitted that I purchased the vehicle of Tata motors
Sumo Ambulance in the year of 2013 and vehicle bearing No AP 9TR 3533.
The said vehicle was insured with the opposite party policy bearing No
2533101200072330 dt 06-03-2013. The vehicle insurance is in force from
06-03-2103 to 05-03-2014.

On 05-04-2013 the said vehicle met with an

accident near sivapuram Village, Markapur Road, Vinukonda, Guntur District

and vehicle fully damaged. After one month the vehicle purchased, the
vehicle met with an accident and fully damaged. I have got repair to my
vehicle in exclusive show room Tata Motors, Guntur. That I have spent of Rs
2,00,000/- nearly and bills was issued by the said show room of Rs
1,65,744-00/-. The said show room bills sent to the opposite party. But the
opposite party settled claim amount only of Rs 82,018/-. The opposite party
is not entitled to do so. I requested number of times the opposite party for
settlement the remaining claim amount but the opposite party did not
respond properly. After one month purchase of the vehicle, the vehicle met
with an accident. The opposite party has no right to decrease claim amount
because of new vehicle and not to take deprecation on new vehicle.
It is humbly submitted that as the opposite party given huge claim
amount to me, I have much loss. The opposite party did not proper
verification the damage vehicle and estimation of the damage vehicle. I lost

of Rs 1,65,744/- as vehicle met with accident. But surveyor estimated the

loss as Rs 82,018/-. The reasons given by the surveyor are not sound and
also not on any basis. The surveyor wrongly estimated the damage and loss
suffered by me is as 82,018/- as against Rs 1,65,744/-. There is no any
reason mentioned the surveyor why the opposite party settled the less claim
amount to me. The opposite party is not given any valid reason to me
regarding to settle the less claim amount.
It is humbly submitted that I got issued legal notice to the opposite
party to settle the claim amount on 06-02-2013. The opposite party gave
reply with false allegations dt 03-04-2014.
It is further submitted that it is the burden duty of the opposite party
to protect and do better services to its customer and also render fair
services in a proper way to the customers, when the customers obtained
policy from the opposite party.
There is deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party in not
settle the claim amount to me.

I am entitled for compensation from the

opposite party.
There is consumer relationship between me and the opposite party.
There is also deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party.

The

transaction has taken place at Markapur within the jurisdiction of this

Honble Forum.
As there is no other goes to resolve his grievances, I approached this
Honble Forum for Justice.
Hence I prays the Honble Forum to direct the opposite party to settle
the remaining claim amount of Rs 1,00,000/- with 12% within time and also
to pay the compensation of Rs 50,000/- along with interest of 9% towards
mental agony caused to me, and also direct the opposite party to pay costs
of Rs 5,000 /- to me and pass such other appropriate orders as the Honble
from deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case in the interest of
the justice.
Be pleased to consider.

Deponent
Solemnly affirmed signed before
me on this day of 2014.
Advocate, Ongole

P.L.P

IN THE COURT OF THE DISTRICT

CONSUMER FORUM: ONGOLE.

CC NO

2014

COMPLAINANT FILED ON BEHALF

OF THE COMPLAINANT UNDER
SECTION 12 OF
CONSUMER
PROTUCTION ACT-1986

FILED BY:P.L.PAVANKUMAR B.COM., B.L.

ADVOCATE,ONGOLE