Delhi

North East

CC/64/2022

Sh. Abhishesh Rajput - Complainant(s)

Versus

Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

01 May 2024

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION: NORTH-EAST

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

D.C. OFFICE COMPLEX, BUNKAR VIHAR, NAND NAGRI, DELHI-93

                                                   Complaint Case No. 64/22

 

 

 

In the matter of:

 

		Sh. Abhishesh Rajput S/o Sh. Bharat Singh R/o Flat No. 1885, DDA Janta Flats, Near GTB Hospital, GTB Enclave, North East Delhi, Delhi-110093		Complainant
		Versus
	1.         2.	Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd. 93, AshokaBhawan, 6th Floor, Nehru Place, Delhi-110019   Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd. G E Plaza (Great Eastern Plaza) Airport Road, Opposite Gunjan Threatre, Pune, Maharastra 411006		Opposite Parties
			DATE OF INSTITUTION:         JUDGMENT RESERVED ON:                           DATE OF ORDER:		16.03.22 28.02.24 01.05.24

 

CORAM:

Surinder Kumar Sharma, President

Anil Kumar Bamba, Member

 

ORDER

Anil Kumar Bamba, Member

The Complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

Case of the Complainant           

1. The case of the Complainant as revealed from the record is the Complainant is the owner of vehicle bearing no. DL 1Z B 2116 covered by a comprehensive insurance policy (i.e. covering own damage of the owner as well as third party liability cover) of Bajaj Allainz General Insurance Company Ltd vide the renewed policy no. OG 19 1105 1803 00000046 effective from 17.04.18 to 16.04.19 for  an amount of Rs. 4,50,000/-. The said policy was renewed for the above said period over email on payment of renewal charges through online mode. On 13.02.19 at 11.15 pm the above said vehicle got stolen thereafter Complainant lodged FIR vide no. 0225/2019 on 25.02.19 at Police Station Bisrakh, District Gautam Buddh Nagar, U.P.  The Complainant intimated the theft of vehicle to Opposite Party and Opposite Party provided claim no. OC 19 1103 1803 00003971.The Opposite Party has also sent two persons for inspection. The said inspection was conducted on 16.02.19 and all the necessary documents namely claim form, copy of registration papers, both the original keys of the vehicle and original permit, fitness and tax paid documents were collected by Opposite Party.Thereafter Complainant contacted Opposite Party for reimbursement of his claim on regular intervals but same was delayed by Opposite Party on one pretext or other. Than Opposite Party stated that his claim would be settled once the final report is submitted and insisted the Complainant for the submission of the final report of the ongoing case pending in the Hon’ble Court of the Ld. Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM), Gautam Buddh Nagar bearing case no. 260/2020 and titled as Raju Vs. State u/s 379 IPC. The Complainant engaged an Advocate and submitted the final report but Opposite Party did not reimburse the claim of Complainant.  The Complainant had sent legal notice to Opposite Party dated 04.02.22 but all in vain. The Complainant had also filed extracts of order no. 7 of 22 of NCDRC regarding condonation of delay. Hence, this shows deficiency in service on behalf of Opposite Party. The Complainant has prayed to reimburse the sum of Rs. 4,50,000/- as the insured amount of vehicle and for the refund of the amount collected for renewal of the general insurance policy for the period 17.04.18 to 16.04.19. The Complainant has also prayed to pay interest @ 18 % p.a. from the date of institution of the claim. Further, he prayed for the mental harassment and for Rs. 20,000/- at least for litigation expenses.

Case of the Opposite Party

2. The Opposite Party contested the case and filed written statement. The Opposite Party stated that the Complainant has not approached this Hon’ble Forum with clean hands and has concealed and suppressed material fact and correspondences between the Complainant vide letters dated 19.10.19, 13.11.19, 23.12.19 and repudiation letter dated 24.02.20.
3. The Complainant has claimed that on 13.12.19 at about 11.15 pm his driver( Mr. Raju) parked the car bearing no. DL 1 ZB 2116 Model Hundai Xcent outside his house at Greater Noida and the next morning i.e. 14.02.19 the car was found missing/stolen. Eventually, an FIR was lodged by driver on 25.02.19 vide FIR No. 0225/2019, at P.S Bisrakh, District Gautam, Buddh Nagar, U.P.
4. The Complainant raised the claim with the Opposite Party, pursuant to which vide letters dated 19.10.19,13.11.19 and 23.12.19 the Opposite Party sought the following documents for processing the claim of the Complainant and the information and documents asked were follows:

Court accepted untraced report, letter of indemnity and subrogation on Rs. 500 stamp paper each duly notarized and signed, Loan account statement and acknowledge letter to RTO for keeping vehicle particular in safe custody.

5. It is stated that till date, despite multiple reminder and after nearly three years from the date of claimed incident the Opposite Party has not submitted court accepted untraced report, loan account statement and acknowledge letter to RTO for keeping vehicle particular in safe custody rendering the Opposite Party inept in processing the claim of the Complainant.
6. The Opposite Party has admitted that the Complainant was having insurance policy OG 19 II OS 1803 00000046 effective from 17.04.18 to 16.04.19 midnight for an amount of Rs. 4,50,000/-. It is submitted that Complainant has given multiple opportunities and was further informed at regular intervals vide letters dated 19.1019, 13.11.19, 23.12.19 to provide the necessary document but the Complainant did not co-operate. Thereafter vide repudiation letter dated 24.02.20 Opposite Party was constrained to close the claim on account of non-cooperation from the side of the Complainant.

 

 

Rejoinder to the written statement of Opposite Party

7. The Complainant filed rejoinder to the written statement of Opposite Party wherein the Complainant has denied the pleas raised by the Opposite Party and has reiterated the assertions made in the complaint.

Evidence of the Complainant

8. The Complainant in support of his complaint filed his affidavit wherein he has supported the averments made in the complaint.

Evidence of the Opposite Party

9. In order to prove its case, Opposite Partyfiled affidavit of Sh. Shyama Charan, Manager (Legal) of Opposite Party, wherein the averments made in the written statement of Opposite Party have been supported.

Arguments & Conclusion

10. We have heard the Ld. Counsels for parties. We have also perused the file and the written arguments filed by the parties. The case of the Complainant is the he is the owner of vehicle bearing no. DL 1Z B 2116 covered by insurance policy of Bajaj Allainz General Insurance Company Ltd vide the renewed policy no. OG 19 1105 1803 00000046 effective from 17.04.18 to 16.04.19 for an amount of        Rs. 4,50,000/-.  The Complainant stated that the said policy was renewed for the above said period over email on payment of renewal charges through online mode. On 13.02.19 at 11.15 pm the above said vehicle got stolen thereafter Complainant lodged FIR vide no. 0225/2019 on 25.02.19 at concerned Police Station.  The Complainant stated that he intimated the theft of vehicle to Opposite Party and Opposite Party provided claim no. OC 19 1103 1803 00003971.The Opposite Party has sent two persons for inspection and the said inspection was conducted on 16.02.19 and all the necessary documents namely claim form, copy of registration papers, both the original keys of the vehicle and original permit, fitness and tax paid documents were collected by Opposite Party.Thereafter Complainant contacted Opposite Party for reimbursement of his claim on regular intervals but same was delayed by Opposite Party on one pretext or other. Further, the Opposite Party stated that his claim would be settled once the final report is submitted and insisted the Complainant for the submission of the final report of the ongoing case pending in the Hon’ble Court of the Ld. Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM), Gautam Buddh Nagar bearing case no. 260/2020 and titled as Raju Vs. State u/s 379 IPC. The Complainant engaged Advocate and submitted the final report but Opposite Party did not reimburse claim of Complainant.  The Complainant had sent legal notice to Opposite Party but all in vain. Hence, this shows deficiency in service on behalf of Opposite Party.
11.  On the other hand, the case of the Opposite Party is that the Complainant was having insurance policy OG 19 II OS 1803 00000046 w.e.f 17.04.18 to 16.04.19 midnight for an amount of Rs. 4,50,000/-. On 13.12.19 at about 11.15 pm the driver of Complainant parked the car bearing no. DL 1 ZB 2116 outside his house at Greater Noida and the next morning i.e. 14.02.19 the car was found missing/stolen. Eventually, an FIR was lodged by driver on 25.02.19 vide FIR No. 0225/2019 at concerned Police Station. The Complainant raised the claim with the Opposite Party and Opposite Party lodged the claim pursuant to which vide letters dated 19.10.19,13.11.19 and 23.12.19 the Opposite Party sought the following documents for processing the claim of the Complainant and the information and documents asked were follows:

Court accepted untraced report, letter of indemnity and subrogation on Rs. 500 stamp paper each duly notarized and signed, Loan account statement and acknowledge letter to RTO for keeping vehicle particular in safe custody.

12. It is submitted that Complainant has given multiple opportunities and was further informed at regular intervals vide above mentioned letters to provide the necessary document but the Complainant did not co-operate. Thereafter vide repudiation letter dated 24.02.20 Opposite Party was constrained to close the claim on account of non-cooperation from the side of the Complainant.
13.  In view of the above, it is clear that Complainant did not lead any evidence regarding supplying of documents as advised by the Opposite Party vide letter dated 24.02.20. Hence, there is no deficiency in service on the part of Opposite Party. Therefore, the complaint is dismissed.

 

 

14. Order announced on 01.05.24

Copy of this order be given to the parties free of cost.

File be consigned to Record Room.

 

(Anil Kumar Bamba)           Member

(Surinder Kumar Sharma) President