Delhi

New Delhi

CC/383/2012

Badri Narayan Chwala - Complainant(s)

Versus

Future Generali India Insurance company Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

30 Nov 2015

ORDER

CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-VI (DISTT. NEW DELHI), ‘M’ BLOCK, 1^STFLOOR,

VIKAS BHAWAN, I.P.ESTATE,

NEW DELHI-110002.

 

Case No.CC/383/12                      Dated:

In the matter of:

SHRI BADRI NARAYAN CHAWLA,

R/O 20/489,

TRILOKPURI,

DELHI-91.

                                                 …….Complainant

 

VERSUS

FUTURE GENERAL INDIA,

INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED

NEW DELHI-01

THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR

KAILASH BUILDING, 3^RD FLOOR, KG MARG, CONNAUGHT PLACE, NEW DELHI.

 

 

………. OPPOSITE PARTY

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ORDER

President:  C.K. Chaturvedi

The complainant’s car bearing No.DL 2EGV 0091 (India), duly insured with OP from 18.6.10 to 19.6.10, was stolen at the night of 14.6.10, the driver of the complainant had parked the vehicle out of the house.  In the morning he find the car missing and police was informed and FIR was registered.  Police gave an untraced report.  The OP on instruction appointed an investigator.  The OP closed the claim of the complainant according its investigation, the vehicle was private but used for hire and reward for commercial purpose which is not covered under the policy.  The complainant did not get any response to legal notice.  Thus complaint of deficiency in service is filed.

          The OP in its reply does not dispute any material facts of theft of vehicle.  It has simply reiterated its stand that vehicle was used for commercial purpose.  Its evidence affidavit is for some efforts.

                    We have considered the evidence of OP, and investigation report.  The report supports       genuineness of theft, but relies on statement of driver that it was used as a pick up vehicle for call centre. The Hon’ble State Commission in the case of Nitin Khandelwal Vs. United Insurance India has laid down that breach of conditions is not genuine in a theft claim of insured vehicle. In view of this the closing of theft claim is illegal and OP has committed deficiency.

          We direct OP to pay IDV of the vehicle insured with it with 9% interest from date of investigation report till payment.  We also direct OP to pay Rs,25000/- as compensation & litigation expenses.  

The order shall be complied with within 30 days of the receipt of the copy of the order; otherwise action can be taken under Section 25 / 27 of the Consumer Protection Act.

File be consigned to record room.

Copy of the order be sent to the parties free

of cost.

Pronounced in open Court on ___________.

 

 

(C.K.CHATURVEDI)

PRESIDENT

 

 

(RITU GARODIA)

MEMBER