The complainant Sri Shivnath Rai has filed this complaint petition against Divisional Manager, The National Insurance Company Ltd. P & T Colony Goshala Road Muzaffarpur (o.p) for realization of Rs. 30182/- as sum assured with 9 % p.a interest from the date of theft, Rs. 25,000/- as compensation of physical and mental harassment and Rs. 10,000/- as litigation cost.
The brief, facts of the case is that the Hero Honda Passion Pro-Motor Cycle of the complainant bearing Registration No.-BR06Y-3369 was insured with o.p company for sum of Rs. 30182/- and the policy No. of the same is 39010231146200648990. The further case is that the aforesaid motor cycle was stolen away on 17-12-2014 during insured period. The further case is that the complainant informed local police, as well as on toll free No. of o.p company on the same day. Police searched motor cycle but the same could not be traced out. So, lastly on 06-01-2015 police registered the FIR on petition dated 17-12-2014 of complainant. The complainant also informed the D.T.O. Muzaffarpur. After Investigation, police submitted final form on 31-03-2015 showing the ‘case true but no clue’ and Learned Court of C.J.M., Muzaffarpur accepted final form on 17-06-2015. The further case is that the complainant filed claim in the office of o.p on 09-07-2015 with relevant documents and original key. The o.p company registered the claim of the complainant vide claim no.- 390102311562290078779. The o.p company didn’t pay the amount for 5 months, so the complainant sent a legal notice on 17-12-2015 through his pleader. Thereafter, the o.p repudiate the claim of the complainant on 24-12-2015.
The complainant has filed the following documents with the complaint petition- Photocopy of certificate cum policy schedule–annexure-1, photocopy of R.C -annexure-2, photocopy of FIR of Muz. (East) sadar P.S. Case No. 12/2015– Annexure-3, photocopy of petition dated 14-01-2015 of Shiv Nath to Branch Manager National Insurance Company -annexure-4, photocopy of petition to D.T.O. Muzaffarpur regarding theft of the vehicle- annexure-5, photocopy of written petition by complainant to o/c of Sadar P.S. dated 17-12-2014 regarding theft of vehicle annexure-6, photocopy of final forms of sadar P.S. Case No. 12/2015 annexure-7 & 8., Photocopy of order sheet dated 17-06-2015 annexure-9, photocopy of legal notice annexure-10 and photocopy of repudiation letter -annexure-11
On issuance of notices, o.p. appeared and filed their w.s. on 12-10-2018 with prayer to dismiss the complaint petition with cost. It has been further mentioned in the w.s. that the case as framed is not maintainable. It has been mentioned in the w.s. that as per FIR, the occurrence of theft is of 17-12-2014 but the information to the Sadar P.S. has been given on 06-01-2015 which clearly shows a delay of 20 days. It has been further mentioned that firstly on date 14-01-2015, complainant submitted written application to the Branch Manager, National Insurance Co. Ltd. about the theft of motorcycle which speak a delay of 28 days that has caused repudiation of claim being suspicious and doubtful claim. It has been further mentioned that nowhere in complaint petition cause of delay has been explained which tantamount to gross negligence on the part of the complainant and hence the case is fit to be dismissed with heavy cost.
No oral evidence has been adduced on behalf of complainant.
No evidence has been adduced on behalf of o.p.
The o.p company has repudiated the claim of the complainant on the ground that he intimated about the occurrence to police on 06-01-2015 and intimated to O.p Company on 14-01-2015. Thus the incident is reported to police 21st day of the accident and the o.p after 28 days delay. Photocopy of repudiation letter has been annexed by the complainant as annexure-11. The complainant has stated in his complaint petition that he informed the local police and o.p company on the same date. He has also mentioned in the complaint petition that he informed the o.p company at his toll free no. The o.p has annexed the photocopy of FIR as annexure-3. On perusal of FIR, it transpires that information to police was given on 06-01-2015 and on the same date FIR was instituted. The complainant has also annexed annexure-1,- Photocopy of written petition which was provided of officer-In-charge of Sadar P.S. as annexure-6. On perusal on the same it transpires that petition is of 17-12-2014. On the same petition it is indorsed by S.H.O on 06-01-2015 which is as follows”-
“Registered P.S. Case No. 12/2015 dated 06-01-2015 u/s 379 of the IPC. Surendre Kr. will please investigator the case”.
The complainant has not adduced any evidence to show that the written petition was filed before officer incharge Sadar P.S. Muzaffarpur on 17-12-2014. No evidence either oral/or documentary has been produced on behalf of complainant to show that the information to police was given on 17-12-2014 . The complainant has also annexed petition filed before B.M. National Insurance Company Ltd. Muzaffarpur regarding the incident of theft as annexure-4. On perusal of the same it transpires that the above petition was filed before Brach Manager, National Insurance Company on 14-01-2015. So, ground of repudiation is proved from the annexures submitted on behalf of complainant and as such the complainant violated the condition of the policy.
In the case of New India Assurance company Ltd. V/s Trilochan Jain IV (2012) C.P.J.441 N.C. Hon’ble National Consumer Redressal Commission New Delhi has observed as follows.- “
“In the case of theft where no bodily injury has been caused to the insured it is incumbent upon the respondent to inform police about the theft immediately say within 24 hours, otherwise valuable time would be lost in tracing the vehicle. Similarly the insurer should also be informed within a day or two so that the insurer can verify as to whether any theft had taken place and also to take immediate steps to get the vehicle traced. The insurer can–coordinate and cooperate with the police to trace the car. Delay in reporting to the insurer about the theft of the car for 9 days, would be a violation of condition of the police as it deprives the insurer of a valuable right to investigate as to the commission of the theft and to trace / help in tracing the vehicle.
In the Case of Shispal V/s Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd. and others first appeal No.54/2014 decided by Chandigarh State Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission, U.T Chandigarh on 01-04-2014 reported in 2014 (2) C.L.T page 443 Hon’ble State Commission Chandigarh has observed as follows in para-19.
“In the instant case as stated above, intimation with regard to the theft of the truck was given after 9 days to the police when the FIR was lodged on 19-10-2011 and to the Insurance company after 4 days. In these circumstances the police was deprived of tracing the truck which might have covered hundreds of kilometers by then and sold to some person. Since it was breach of the fundamental conditional no.-1 of the terms and conditions of the Policy referred to above, the repudiation of claim of the complainant , by o.p. no.-1 could not be said to be illegal and arbitrary. The District Forum also placed reliance upon New India Assurance Company Ltd. V/s Trilochain Jain case (Supra) in dismissing the complaint, while coming to the conclusion that the repudiation was legal and valid. The findings of the District Forum, In this regard being correct are affirmed.”
On the basis of above discussion and the observations of the Hon’ble National Commission and State Commission of Chandigarh we are of the considered opinion that the complainant his informed the police on 20th day and o.p company after 28 days from the incident and as such there is violation of terms and condition of the policy and the o.p company has rightly repudiated the claim of the complainant.
Accordingly, the complaint petition is dismissed.
