JUDGMENT

The instant case was instituted on the basis of a petition of complaint filed by one Anarul Sk. of Vill. Nasirchak under the P.S. English Bazar, Dist. – Maldau/s. 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 on the basis of a petition and the said petition was registered before this Forum as complaint Case No. 22/2018.

The fact of the case as revealed from the petition of complaint as well as from the evidence is that the complainant purchased one motorcycle at the sum of Rs. 77,000/- (Rupees Seventy Seven Thousand Only)and the said vehicle was insured with the O.P. United India Insurance Company bearing Policy No. 031400311P107540934 valid from 09/09/2016 to 08/09/2017. On 24/10/2016 at 02-00 P.M. the complainant went to SBI, Milki Branch along with his motor cycle bearing No. WB66L4148 and he entered into the bank premises after parking the said motor cycle in the schedule place of parking place. After working from the bank the complainant returned and found that his motor cycle was not in the parking place. Then he enquired and informed the matter to the local Police Out Post at Milkiorally and the personnel of Police Out Post informed him orally that he looked into the matter. On 28/11/2016 the complainant went to Milki outpost to receive the complaint and after enquiry it was referred to English Bazar Police Station as the Milki outpost is under English Bazar Police Station and the Officer –in-Charge, English Bazar Police Station started a case bearing No. 979/2016 dt. 21/11/2016 u/s. 379. The complainant also informed the matter to the Insurance Company and also submitted claim form but ultimately on 29/11/2016 the Insurance Company issued a letter of repudiation. As such the complainant has come to this Forum now Commission to get his relief.

The petition has been contested by the O.P. United India Insurance Company by filing written version denying all the material allegation as levelled against the Insurance Company contending inter alia that the instant case is not maintainable in its present form. The case is bad for non-joinder and mis-joinder. The case is also barred by law of limitation and there is no cause of action to file this case.

The definite defense case is that the incident took place on 24/10/2016 after the lapse of long days which is a gross violation of the terms and conditions of the policy and the complainant also did not inform the Insurance Company immediately after the incident.  So considering such facts and circumstances the instant case is liable to be dismissed with cost.                                  

In order to prove the case the complainant was examined as P.W.-1 and cross-examined and file some documents and the documents have been marked exhibits as per exhibited list and one witness Akbar Sk. was examined as PW-2 and cross-examined.

On the other hand no witness was examined on behalf of the O.P. Insurance Company

Now the points for determination: Whether the complainant is entitled to get any relief as prayed for.                         

::DECISION WITH REASONS::                                     

At the time of argument the Ld.Lawyer of the complainant submitted that the incident took place on 24/10/2016 but the Milki outpost did not receive the written complaint nor forwarded the same to the English Bazar Police Station. This is why there was delay in lodging complaint on 21/11/2016.

According to the argument as advanced by the Ld. lawyer of the complainant is that on the date of incident i.e. on 24/10/2016 the complainant went to the Milki outpost for lodging complaint but the Police Personnel only stated that they look into the matter. It is not understood why the complainant did not lodge any complaint before the higher Police Authority for non-lodging of FIR about the theft of the vehicle. Moreover, no document is forthcoming before this Forum to show that the complainant informed the Insurance Company immediately. According to the terms and condition of the policy “as and when any theft of vehicle occurs the insured will immediately inform to the Police Station and to the Insurance Company. But for the instant case it is found that there was a long delay for lodging F.I.R. to the Police Station and explanation was given is not at all believable.                                                                            

The Ld.Lawyer of the complainant submitted that in the copy of FIR the date has been written 24/10/2016 whereas the Police Station received the information on 21/11/2016. So there were no latches on the part of the complainant. But the date mentioned as 24/10/2016 on the Xerox copy of the FIR. Definitely, it indicates that it was manipulated. The Forum now Commission asked the Ld.Lawyer of the complainant to call for the original record from the GR office Malda for which near about one month time was given but no fruitful result was found. So definitely the date 24/10/2016 was written by tampering.

The Ld.Lawyer of the O.P. submitted that due to the gross violation of the policy the claim was repudiated as such the case is liable to be dismissed.

This Forum now Commission is also in the same view of the argument of the Ld.Lawyer of the O.P. that due to gross violation of the terms and condition of the policy the case is required to be dismissed.                                                                                                                                          

C.F. paid is correct

Hence, ordered that

the instant case be and same is dismissed on contest with cost of Rs.5000/- as it appears that the complainant manipulated the date in the xerox copy of the FIR.

The cost is to be paid by the complainant within one month from the order to the OP Insurance Co. failing which the Insurance Co. will have the liberty execute the same as per provision of the law.                                          

 Let a copy of this order be given to the parties free of cost on proper application.