By Sri. K Gheevarghese, President<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> The complaint filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.<br /> <br /> <br /> The gist of the complaint is as follows.<br /> <br /> <br /> The Complainant is the Registered Co-operative Milk Society functioning in accordance with the Societies Act. The Complainant insured the building of the milk society and it has been renewed from time to time from 1996 onwards. As per the terms and conditions of the policy, the Opposite Party, the insured, is liable to compensate the Complainant in case of any theft if effected. While the policy was in effect in between 5.20 PM on 11.07.2002 and 5.55 AM on 12.07.2002 Rs.48,500/- which was kept in the Godrej Shelf of the Complainant's Society was stolen. Intimation was given to the Police Pulpally and crime was registered No. 142/2002 under section 457, 380, 461 of Indian Penal Code. The case was later referred in non detection of the accused. The Complainant alleged a claim before Opposite Party along with the original of the Insurance Policy. The Opposite Party was not ready to respond positively to the claim so far. The amount kept in the custody of the Complainant was the amount withdrawn from the bank on 11.07.2002 and also the collection of the day. The non settlement of the claim even after repeated demand of the Complainant is deficiency in service. <br /> <br /> 2. On 25.9.2003 upon the request of the Opposite Party for a clarification regarding policy claim the Opposite Party informed the Complainant on 27.11.2003 that the policy was closed and with endorsement 'no claim'. A review petition was also filed before the Opposite Party as per which the Complainant was directed to produce some more documents. Even after producing all the documents the Opposite Party was neither ready to afford the claim amount nor repudiate the claim. The Opposite Party may be directed with an order to give the Complainant Rs.48,500/- along with 15% interest from 12.7.2002 onwards along with cost and other compensation. <br /> <br /> 3. The Opposite Party filed version on their appearance. The policy issued to the Complainant is a money transit policy. The risk covers under section 1 of the money in transit profit in respect of salaries, wages other earnings and petty cash. Only transit from the Complainant society to bank Pulpally at Padichira and also the money in personal custody of the insured or authorised employees of the insured whilst in direct transit between premises and bank or Post Office. The risk also covers during the business hours or whilst secure in locked safe or locked strong room on insured premises. Out of business hours against the risk, burglary, house braking and hold up. As per the policy exclusion terms the Opposite Party is not liable to give the claim amount unless money is kept in locked safe or strong room. The money kept by the Complainant was not in a locked safe or strong room but in the almira. The steps were not taken by the Complainant to safe guard the property insured against loss or damage. Beyond that the Complainant has not produced the relevant document that Rs.48,500/- was kept in cash balance there. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party as per the provisions of Co operative Societies Act such a huge amount keeping in the Co-operative Society is against provisions of the Primary Society. The amount claimed by the Complainant is excessive unreasonable and baseless. The complainant is not entitled to get 15% interest as claimed. The complaint is to be dismissed with cost to the Opposite Party. <br /> <br /> 4. The points in consideration are:<br /> 1.Is there any deficiency in service in repudiating the claim.<br /> 2.Relief and cost.<br /> <br /> 5. Point No.1: The Complainant filed proof affidavit and the documents Ext.A1 to A11 are marked. The Secretary of the Complainant is examined as PW1, Ext.B1 to B5 are marked on the side of the opposite party.. The case of the Complainant is that Rs.48,500/- which was kept in the Godrej Almira safe was stolen. The Police registered crime and it was referred and a notice in that respect was given to the Complainant. The Complainant was a policy holder since 1996. The terms and conditions of the policy were absolutely maintained by the Complainant. Whereas the Opposite Party rejected the claim with a notice. The Opposite Party is liable to compensate the Complainant as per the terms and conditions of the money in transit policy. <br /> <br /> 6. According to the Opposite Party the Complainant was not maintaining the stipulations in the policy. The claim of the complainant was repudiated on the ground that the money was not kept in a “locked strong room” or locked safe out side business hours. Ext.A4 is the letter sent to the Complainant closing the file as no claim. Ext.A10 is the policy schedule Sec.1 (A) of the schedule detail the conditions to be pertained as per which out of business hours such cash shall be kept in locked safe or locked strong room in the premises. According to the opposite party the amount which was kept out of the business ours was not properly secured. Ext.A1 is the FIR, as per which the front door of the Ksheerolpadaka Sahakarana Sangam building was broken and entering in to the building the lock of Godrej Almira was broken and the amount kept in the locker Rs.48,500/- was stolen. The money which was stolen from the building was safely kept in the locker of a Godrej Almira which was locked. The purpose of the conditions required are to keep the amount in full safety. The amount kept in Almira was locked and reasonable and proper care was shown by the Complainant keeping the money in safe custody. Ext.A11 is the policy, the coverage of the insurance is given to the furniture which includes the Godrej safe. The Opposite Party on examination deposed that the insured was verified by an agent and through this agent the policy was issued according to this the furniture and Godrej safe are insured. As per the claim form Ext.B3 the Godrej shelf was broken and the money was taken out. The only dispute in the non issuance of the claim of the Opposite Party is that the money was not kept in safe custody instead it was in Godrej Almira. The Complainant is the secretary in the Milk Society in the Village area it cannot be considered that reasonable care and consideration was not given in keeping the money in safe and secure custody out of the business hours. The money was taken from the locker in the Godrej Almira which all were locked. The repudiation of the claim by the Opposite Party is a the deficiency in service and the point No.1 is found accordingly.<br /> <br /> 7. Point No.2:- The Opposite Party has not stated that the amount which was stolen from the Complainants custody did not tally with the claim that they made. According to the Complainant Rs.48,500/- was stolen. The Opposite Party has not rejected the claim on the ground that the amount claimed is not bonofide. The insured is entitled for the coverage of the risk ensured by the insurer, the Opposite Party has to give the Complainant the amount lost in theft. <br /> In the result, the complaint is partly allowed. The Opposite Party is directed to pay the Complainant Rs.48,500/- (Rupees Forty Eight thousand Five hundred only) along with cost of Rs.500/-(Rupees five hundred only) within one month from the date of this order.<br /> <br /> <br /> Pronounced in open Forum on this the 18th day of March 2008.<br /> <br /> <br /> PRESIDENT: Sd/-<br /> <br /> <br /> MEMBER: Sd/-<br /> <br /> <br /> /True copy/<br /> Sd/-<br /> PRESIDENT, CDRF, WAYANAD.<br /> <br /> APPENDIX:<br /> <br /> Witness examined for Complainant:<br /> PW1 Mathai M.A. Secretary of the complainant<br /> Witness examined for Opposite party:<br /> OPW1 Raghavan Manager<br /> Exhibits marked for Complainant:<br /> A1 Copy of FIR dt 12.7.02<br /> A2 copy of reference notice<br /> A3 letter dt 25.9.03 <br /> A4 Copy of letter dt. 27.11.03<br /> A5 letter dt.16.2.2004<br /> A6 letter dt. 12.4.2005<br /> A7 Decessions of director board<br /> A8 Bi-Law<br /> Contd......6) <br /> 6<br /> A9 Bill<br /> A10 Series Policy scheduel<br /> A11 Policy<br /> Exhibits marked for opposite party:<br /> B1 proposal form<br /> B2 insurance policy and schedule<br /> B3 Claim form<br /> B4 Claim intimation<br /> B5 Copy of policy<br />