Orissa

Cuttak

CC/180/2021

Chittaranjan Nayak - Complainant(s)

Versus

IFFCO -TOKIO General Insurance co LTD - Opp.Party(s)

R C Nayak & associates

30 Dec 2022

ORDER

IN THE COURT OF THE DIST. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,CUTTACK.

C.C.No.180/2021

 

Chittaranjan Nayak,

S/O:SubashNayak,Village:BadaPalada,

P.O/P.S:Marshaghai,Dist:Kendrapara.                                     ... Complainant.

 

                                                             Vrs.

1. IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,

Regd. Office: IffcoSadan C I Distt.Centre Saket,

New Delhi-110017.

 

2. Manager,

IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,

Unit no.3, 2^ndFloor,New Trade Centre Paradeep,

Dist:Jagatsinghpur.                                                                        ... Opp. Parties.

 

 

Present:Sri Debasish Nayak,President.

             Sri SibanandaMohanty,Member.

 

  Date of filing:     03.11.2021

Date of Order:    30.12.2022

 

For the complainant:           Mr. R.C.Nayak,Adv. & Associates.

For the O.Ps.               :None.

 

Sri Debasish Nayak,President.                                                           

     The case of the complainant as made out from the complaint petition in short is that the complainant had insured his tractor bearing Regd. No.OR-29-1969 with the O.Ps and it was effective till 15.4.2017 midnight.  He had engaged the said tractor on hire for cultivation purposes by virtue of a lease with Santosh Swain.  The said tractor was stolen in the midnight of 5.10.2016 while being parked by the side of the road near RanipadaChhackwithin Cuttack-Chandbali Road.  The matter was reported by the complainant at Nischintakoili P.S but his FIR was not accepted for which the complainant had to initiate a complaint case before the learned JMFC,Salepur on 17.10.16 which was sent to the IIC, Nischintakoili P.S with a direction to investigate into the matter.  On 16.11.18 the police had submitted final form with opinion “of No clue”.  The matter of theft of the tractor alongwith its trailer was reported to the O.Ps but no result yielded in settling the claim for which the complainant had sustained a loss of Rs.10,00,000/-.  It is for this the complainant had to file the present case before this Commission claiming a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- from the O.Ps.

     The complainant has filed copies of certain documents in order to prove his case.

2.  On the other hand having not contested this case, both the O.Ps were set exparte vide order dt.24.5.2022.

3.       The points for determination in this case are as follows:

i.          Whether the case of the complainant is maintainable?

ii.         Whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps and if they have practised any unfair trade?

iii.        Whether the complainant is entitled to the reliefs as claimed by him?

Point No. ii.

Out of the three points, point no. ii being the pertinent one is taken up first for consideration here in this case.

On perusal of the complaint petition, it is noticed that the tractor of the complainant was stolen in the night of 5.10.16 and the complainant had gone immediately on the next morning to the spot after receiving a telephonic call about the theft of his tractor with trailer. After a frantic search the complainant had gone to the Nischintakoili P.S for filing his FIR.  As because his FIR was not accepted by the police personnelsat Nischintakoili P.S he had filed a complaint case before the learned JMFC,Salepur vide one C.C.No.324 of 2016.   On 17.10.16 the learned JMFC,Salepur had directed the IIC,Nischintakoili P.S for enquiring into the matter which was thereafter registered at the said P.S.  Ultimately, the police had submitted final form on 16.11.18 with opinion “of no clue”.  After running many a times to the O.Ps, and knowing about the claim to be filed through a claim form, the complainant hadthereafter made a claim accordingly before the O.Ps.  The claim was not settled for which the complainant had approached before this Commission.  The complainant has relied upon a pertinent decision as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of JainaConstruction Company Vrs. The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd and another wherein their lordships have held that in case of theft of vehicle, the Insurance Company cannot repudiate the claim merely on the ground that there was delay in intimating the Insurance Company about the occurrence of theft when the insured lodged FIR immediately after the theft of the vehicle.  In the present case after getting information about the theft, the complainant had proceeded to the spot immediately on the next morning of the theft, he had made a thorough search and had gone to Nischintakoili P.S to lodge FIR but when his FIR was not accepted he had to initiate a complaint case before the learned JMFC,Salepur which was sent to the IIC,Nischintakoili P.S on 17.10.16 for enquiry into the matter by learned JMFC,Salepur.  Thus, it can be said here in this case that there was no delay on the part of the complainant when he had acted as per law, initially by going to the spot then to the police station and when he found the inaction of the police by not accepting his FIR he had to knock the door of the court by filing a complaint petition there before the learned JMFC,Salepur.  Thus, there is absolutely no delay here and accordingly when probed into the facts and circumstances of the materials and evidence as available in this case record, it goes to show that infact there was theft of the tractor with the trailer of the complainant, the complainant had infact sustained a loss and since because he had insured his tractor with trailer he is entitled to receive the sum of Rs.10,00,000/- from the O.Ps  as per his claim and by not settling his claim promptly, the O.Ps are found to be deficient in their service towards the complainant and thereby have also practised unfair trade.

Points no.i& iii.

From the discussions as made above, the case of the complainant is maintainable and the complainant is entitled to the reliefs as claimed by him.     

ORDER

The case is decreed on contest against the O.Ps who are found to be jointly and severally liable here in this case.  Thus, the O.Ps are directed to pay an amount of Rs.10,00,000/- to the complainant towards the claim amount alongwith interest @ 12% per annum with effect from the date of application i.e. 17.10.2016 till the final payment is made.  This order is to be carried out within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of this order.

Order pronounced in the open court on the 30^th day of   December,2022 under the seal and signature of this Commission.   

                                                                                                                          Sri Debasish Nayak

                                                                                                                                    President

                       

                                                                                                                     Sri Sibananda Mohanty

                                                                                                                         Member