Haryana

Karnal

CC/288/2022

Suresh Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

Cholamandalam Ms General Insurance Company Limited - Opp.Party(s)

Ashok Kumar Kurlan

10 Jun 2022

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KARNAL.

 

                                                          Complaint No. 288 of 2022

                                                          Date of instt.25.05.2022

                                                          Date of Decision 10.06.2022

 

Suresh Kumar son of Shri Ram Saran, resident of village Koer, Tehsil Nigdhu, District Karnal.

                                                 …….Complainant.

                                              Versus

 

Cholamandlam MS General Insurance Co. Ltd. Sector-12, Urban Estate, Karnal through its Branch Manager (Insurer of vehicle bearing Chassis no.AZJSG72403953, Engine no.3100FIU83C716490F18, vide policy no.3380/01382001/000/00, valid since 17.05.2018 to 16.05.2019.

                                                                        …..Opposite Party.

 

      Complaint u/s 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019

 

Before   Sh. Jaswant Singh……President.       

      Sh.Vineet Kaushik ………..Member

      Dr. Rekha Chaudhary……Member

 

 Present: Shri S.S.Moonak proxy counsel for

                Shri Ashok Kumar Kurlan Advocate for complainant.

                                        

                (Jaswant Singh President)

ORDER:                    

 

                        This complaint has been filed by the complainant u/s 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the opposite party (hereinafter referred to as ‘OP’) on the averments that complainant was owner of tractor bearing chasis no.AZJSG72403953, Engine no.3100FIU83C716490F18 and got it insured with OP for a sum of Rs.4,94,000/-, vide policy no.3380/01382001/000/00, valid from 17.05.2018 to 16.05.2019 and paid a sum of Rs.10,380/- being premium of the vehicle. On 15.10.2018 some unknown person had stolen the abovesaid vehicle and thereafter, the complainant lodged an FIR no.1236 dated 30.10.2018, under section 379 IPC, with Police Station, Sadar, Karnal. On the next day, complainant went to local office of OP and informed them about the theft of the vehicle. The official of the OP stated that as and when the untraced report is submitted by the police, the claim of the complainant will be settled and until and unless the untraced report is not submitted by the police in the court, till then claim cannot be settled. Thereafter, complainant visited the Police Station many times to trace out the vehicle, but police did not give the satisfactory reply to the complainant and said that as and when the vehicle is recovered, police will inform the complainant. The police has submitted the untrace report in the court. Thereafter, complainant alongwith untrace report and other relevant documents went to the office of OP and produced all the paper and requested the OPs to settle the claim of the complainant but OP did not pay any heed to the request of complainant. In this way there is deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OP. Hence this complaint.

2.             Today the case is fixed for arguments on the point of admissibility of the complaint. Arguments not advanced on behalf the complainant. Request for adjournment. The present complaint has been filed by the complainant on 25.05.2022 and the same was fixed for 26.05.2022, but on the request of learned counsel for complainant the same was adjourned for today i.e. 10.06.2022 for consideration, on the point of admissibility. As per Section 36(2) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, admissibility of the complaint required to be decided within twenty one days of filing of the complaint. The Section 36 (2) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 reproduced as under:-

(2)   On receipt of a complaint made under section 35, the District Commission may, by order, admit the complaint for being proceeded with or reject the same:

 Provided that a complaint shall not be rejected under this section unless an opportunity of being heard has been given to the complainant:

Provided further that the admissibility of the complaint shall ordinarily be decided within twenty-one days from the date on which the complaint was filed.

      

       The prescribed period for admissibility of the complaint is going to expire. Further adjournment not justified.

3.             Record perused.

4.           As per version of the complainant, his vehicle had been stolen on 15.10.2018 by some unknown person and he had lodged the FIR in this regard on 15.10.2018. But on perusal of FIR, it reveals that the FIR was lodged on 25.12.2018 i.e. after the delay of approximately two and half months. There is nothing on the file to prove that the complainant has intimated the OP and got lodged FIR within time. It is not possible for the police to recover the vehicle in question when the intimation was  given so late . It appears that complainant has intentionally and deliberately not informed to the police in time as well as OP. Furthermore, if the complainant would have lodged the FIR within time, the police shall take necessary action to recover the vehicle in question. Complainant has also deprived the legitimate right of the OP to help the police to recover the vehicle in question. In view of the above, it was the complainant, who has not informed the police as well as to OP within time with regard to alleged theft of the vehicle. Moreover, there is nothing on file to prove that complainant had intimated the OP with regard to theft till date.

5.             In view of the above discussion, the present complaint is devoid of any merits and deserves to be dismissed and the same is hereby dismissed. Party concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and file be consigned to the record room.

Announced
Dated: 10.06.2022

                                                                 President,

                                                   District Consumer Disputes

                                                   Redressal Commission, Karnal.

 

       

                (Vineet Kaushik)        (Dr. Rekha Chaudhary)      

                      Member                        Member