1.                     The brief history of the case of the complainant is that his Hero Honda Passion PRO motorcycle bearing No.OR-10J 7297 was insured with the OP vides policy No.005/23680404/10220/000 valid from 19.7.14 to 18.7.2015 and on 16.10.14 the said vehicle was missing from Head Post Office, Main Road, Jeypore while on parking.  It is submitted that a missing report was lodging before the Town PS, Jeypore on 16.10.2014 but the PS registered the case vide SD Entry No.229 on 14.11.2014 and the said case is pending before the Hon’ble SDJM, Jeypore in GR case No.758/14.  It is further submitted that the complainant made a claim before the OP under insurance but on 10.3 2015 the OP repudiated the claim stating that the FIR has been filed after 28 days of incident and the delay of 31 days in intimating the Insurance Co.  The complainant also submitted that he had lodged complaint with Police immediately but the Police might have registered the case at a later stage.  Thus alleging unfair trade practice on the part of the OP, he filed this case praying the Forum to direct the OP to pay the cost of the motorcycle at Rs.54, 000/- with interest and to pay Rs.40,000/- towards compensation and cost to the complainant.

2.                     The OP filed counter denying the allegations of the complainant and contended that the motorcycle was stolen on 16.10.14 but the complainant has intimated the Police on 14.11.2014 and hence the alleged fact of the complainant is doubtful.  The OP also contended that since there is a delay of 28 days in filing FIR, the Insurance Co. is not liable to settle the claim.  It is also further contended that the complainant has not filed the copy of charge sheet against any person till date and also failed to submit required documents.  Thus denying maintainability of this case, the OP prayed to dismiss the case of the complainant.

3.                     Both the parties have filed certain documents along with affidavit in support of their cases.  Heard from the parties through their respective A/Rs and perused the materials available on record.

4.                     In this case, the complainant stated that he parked his insured motorcycle bearing No. OR 10J 7297 in front of Head Post Office, Jeypore and went to daily market on 16.10.2014 and when returned from the market, he found that his motorcycle is missing.  He informed the Police on the same day but the Police entered the complaint in their Station Diary vide No.229 dt.14.11.2014 and the case is pending in the Court of Hon’ble SDJM, Jeypore vide G. R. Case No.758/2014.  The case of the complainant is that he informed the OP and filed claim form along with necessary papers but the OP through their letter dt.10.3.2015 intimated that there was a delay of 28 days in filing FIR and 31 days in intimating the Insurance Company and hence the OP repudiated the claim.

6.                     The OP stated that since the fact of theft was intimated after 28 days of occurrence to the Police, the Insurance Co. is not liable for settlement of the claim.  It is a fact that the case has been registered on 14.11.2014.  The complainant has also filed copy of his FIR dt.16.10.2014 to the Police in this case.  Further it is seen that another intimation letter dt.14.11.2014 of the complainant has been filed and the Police has accepted the said report as FIR after 28 days of occurrence.  From the above 2 reports before us, it can be said that soon after the theft occurred, there may not be any hesitation on the part of the complainant to report the Police about the fact.  If the Police take time for formal inquiry and accepting the report of the complainant at a later stage, then there lies no fault on the part of the complainant.  Therefore, we accept the report dt.16.10.2014 as theft intimation to the police by the complainant

7.                     It is further seen that the missing report has been treated as FIR by Police on 14.11.2014 i.e. after 28 days of occurrence and the OP says that the complainant has intimated the OP after 31 days of incident.  The condition No.1 of Motor Insurance Policy as mentioned in the repudiation letter dt.10.3.2015 says that “Any process or copy thereof shall be forwarded to the Insurance Co. immediately on receipt by the insured”.  In this case, the complainant has received the copy of FIR from the Police on 14.11.2014 and within 3 days it was filed before the OP and the claim form has been submitted on 10.12.2014.  Hence we find that the complainant has acted upon soon after the occurrences and as such the plea taken by the OP is not sustainable under law.

8.                     Further it is seen that the case has been filed u/s.379 IPC and the statement of witness u/s.161 has been obtained by the Police.  The Police has also conducted necessary inquiry and probable places have been searched for but in vain.  From the above facts and circumstances, it can be concluded that the vehicle of the complainant has been stolen and the intimation regarding theft to Police as well as to the OP was in time.  But in spite of all those appropriate steps taken by the complainant, the OP has repudiated the claim which in our opinion is not based on valid grounds.  Therefore, the complainant is entitled to get the declared insured value of Rs.34, 944/- with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of repudiation i.e. 10.3.2015.  Further due to such repudiation of the claim, the complainant must have sustained some mental agony and has also filed this case incurring some expenditure.  Considering the sufferings of the complainant, we feel a sum of Rs.5000/- towards compensation and cost in favour of the complainant will meet the ends of justice.

9.                     Hence ordered that the complaint petition is allowed in part and the OP is directed to pay Rs.34, 944/- towards insured value of the vehicle with interest @ 9% p.a. from 10.03.2015 and to pay Rs.5000/- towards compensation and costs to the complainant within 30 days from the date of communication of this order.

(to dict.)