DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, JHARSUGUDA

CONSUMER COMPLAINT CASE NO. 80 OF 2014

Tej Kalwani,

S/O- Dayaram kalwani,

R/O: Belpahar,( Rly. Station) PO/PS: Belpahar, 

Dist: Jharsuguda,Odisha………………………………………………Complainant.

Versus

1. Branch Manager,

ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd.,

15 Park Street, Apeejay House, Block B, 7^th Floor,

Kolkatta- 700 016.

2. ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd.,

ICICI Lombard House, 414 Veer Savarkar Marg,

Nr. Siddhi Vinayak Temple, Prabhadevi,

Mumbai- 400 025…….….………………………..….…....….…...Opp. Parties.

Counsel for the Parties:-

For the Complainant                                       Shri P.R. Singhdeo, Adv. & Associates.

For the Opp. Parties                                       Shri B.N.Dutta, Adv. & Associates.

Date of Order: 14.07.2015

Present

                                                                                 1. Shri S.L.Behera, President.

                                                                                2. Shri S.K. Ojha, Sr. Member.

                                                                               3. Smt. A. Nanda, Member.

Shri S. L. Behera, President : - The brief facts of the complainant’s case is that, he is a registered owner of one two wheeler bearing Regn. No. CG-13-U-6125 which was insured with the O.Ps. The IDV value of the said vehicle is Rs. 45,505/- only.  The said vehicle has lost on dtd. 29.01.2014 from the in front of his house. The matter has been intimated orally to the concerned police station at Belpahar where as per the instructions of the IIC, Belpahar the complainant along with his son searched the said vehicle at all nearby places around the Belpahar but on getting no information the complainant lodged FIR on dtd. 06.02.2014 before the IIC, Belpahar.  The complainant was out of station for medical treatment of his grand mother soon after lodging of FIR.  Thereafter the complainant intimated the O.ps. about the said lost of his vehicle which was registered under claim No. MOTO3631286 dtd. 21.02.2014. The complainant followed all the formalities for settlement of his insurance claim and also clarified the reasons of lodging FIR in a little delay but in spite of settling the insurance claim the O.Ps. repudiated the same illegally which amounts to deficiency in service as alleged by the complainant, hence this case.

The O.Ps. appeared through their counsel after being noticed and submitted his written version wherein it has been stated that the complainant has violated the terms and conditions of the insurance policy in lodging of FIR and intimating the matter to the O.Ps in writing and on the said ground the claim has been repudiated and denying all the allegations imposed by the complainant and the O.Ps. prayed for dismissal of the case.  

Heard the matter in length and perused the case record along with materials available.

It is not disputed that the vehicle has been theft, It is also not disputed that the complainant has performed all the formalities in filing of insurance claim rather the O.Ps. have to interrupted in settling of the insurance claim of complainant on the points of  lodging of FIR and intimating to the O.Ps. in 08 days and 23 days respectively as per terms and conditions of insurance policy. 

In a case between CEO, Cholamandalam MS General Insurance Company Ltd. & others versus Abhijat Saini & others 2014(4)CLT-Page-502 decided on 29.09.2014 by National Consumer dispute Redressal Commission, New Delhi, wherein it has been held that “though, there was some delay in informing the petitioners regarding the accident but as per the insurance policy no specific period has been mentioned- Revision petition dismissed”. Thus the provisions of delay in informing the insurance company of lodging the report with the police are of little significance as these are of directory in nature and not of the mandatory nature.

On the above facts and circumstances, we are in considered opinion to allow the complaint petition with directions to the O.Ps. to settle the insurance claim on non-standard basis and to pay 75% of IDV of the vehicle within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order, failing which interest @ 10% per annum will be charged by the O.Ps till realization.  

   Accordingly the case is disposed of.

Order pronounced in the open court today the 14^th   day of July’ 2015 and copy of this order shall be supplied to the parties as per rule.

                                      I Agree.                       I Agree,                                                                                               

                         A.Nanda, Member (W)           S.K.Ojha, Sr.Member                         S. L. Behera President

                               Dictated and corrected by me

                                  S. L. Behera President