Haryana

StateCommission

A/1062/2015

BAJAJ ALLIANZ GEN. INSURANCE CO.LTD. - Complainant(s)

Versus

AMAR SINGH - Opp.Party(s)

GAURAV SHARMA

19 Oct 2016

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA, PANCHKULA

                                                 

 

First Appeal No  :    1062 of 2015

Date of Institution:    11.12.2015

Date of Decision :     19.10.2016

 

Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Limited, SCO 30, SF, Brass Market, Sector 1, Rewari (Haryana) through Sh. Navjeet Singh, Assistant Manager (Legal), Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Limited, SCO No.14, 4^th Floor, Urban Estate, Sector 5, Panchkula.

                                     Appellant-Opposite Party

 

Versus

 

Amar Singh son of Sh. Musadi Lal, resident of Village Nangal Mala, Tehsil and District Mahendergarh (Haryana).

                                      Respondent-Complainant

 

 

                                   

CORAM:             Hon’ble Mr. Justice Nawab Singh, President.

                             Shri B.M. Bedi, Judicial Member.

                            

 

Argued by:          Shri Gaurav Sharma, Advocate for appellant.

Shri Sandeep Kumar Yadav, Advocate the respondent

 

 

                                                   O R D E R

 

 

NAWAB SINGH J.(ORAL)

 

          By filing this appeal, Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Limited-opposite party (for short, ‘Insurance Company’) has challenged the order dated October 12^th, 2015 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Narnaul (for short ‘the District Forum’) whereby complaint filed by Amar Singh-complainant was allowed.  The Insurance Company was directed to pay Rs.4,24,821/-, that is, sum insured alongwith interest at the rate of 10% per annum from the date of filing the complaint till realization and Rs.2200/- litigation expenses, to the complainant on account of theft of vehicle bearing Chassis Number 11928 and Engine Number 613386.

2.      The complainant purchased vehicle on December 28^th, 2009.  The vehicle was temporarily registered for one month period, which expired on January 27^th, 2010.  The vehicle was snatched on September 15^th, 2010, that is, after 07 months 19 days on expiry of temporary registration.   First Information Report No.337 (Annexure A-6) was registered on September 16^th, 2010 in Police Station Mahendergarh.  The complainant filed claim with the Insurance Company but the same was repudiated on the ground that the vehicle was not registered after the expiry of temporary registration. 

3.      Admittedly, the vehicle was being driven without any valid registration on the date of incident as contemplated under the provisions of Section 39 and 43 of Motor Vehicles Act.  In Narinder Singh vs. New India Assurance Company Limited and others, Civil Appeal No.8463 of 2014 decided on September 04^th, 2014 vehicle was granted temporary registration for one month, which expired on January 11^th, 2016.  The vehicle met with an accident on February 02^nd, 2006, that is, after 22 days on expiry of temporary registration. Hon’ble Supreme Court held that using a vehicle on the public road without any registration is not only an offence punishable under Section 192 of the Motor Vehicles Act but also a fundamental breach of the terms and conditions of the policy contract. 

4.      In view of the above, it is held that the Insurance Company rightly repudiated the claim of the complainant. District Forum fell in error in allowing the complaint and as such the impugned order cannot be allowed to sustain. The appeal is accepted, the impugned order is set aside and the complaint is dismissed.

5.                The statutory amount of Rs.25,000/- deposited at the time of filing the appeal be refunded to Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Limited-appellant against proper receipt and identification in accordance with rules, after the expiry of period of appeal/revision, if any.

 

 

 

Announced 19.10.2016

(B.M. Bedi) Judicial Member

(Nawab Singh) President

UK