| Final Order / Judgement | CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-VII DISTRICT: SOUTH-WEST GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI FIRST FLOOR, PANDIT DEEP CHAND SHARMA SAHKAR BHAWAN SECTOR-20, DWARKA, NEW DELHI-110077 CASE NO.CC/314/18 Date of Institution:- 09.08.2018 Order Reserved on:- 16.11.2023 Date of Decision:- 14.03.2024 IN THE MATTER OF: Shri Ajeet Kumar, S/o Shri Chhote Lal R/o 9688, Street No.10, Multani Dhanda, Sadar Thana Road, Pahar Ganj, Swami Ram Tirath Nagar, New Delhi - 5 .….. Complainant VERSUS Iffco-Tokio General Insurance Co. Ltd. Through its Branch Manager/Concerned Officials 6th Floor, Ansal Imperial Tower, C-Block, Community Centre, Naraina Vihar, New Delhi – 110028 Also Regd. Office at Iffco Sadan C1, Distt. Centre Saket, New Delhi .…..Opposite Party ORDER Per Dr. Harshali Kaur, Member - The Complainant took an OP policy for a fixed period of 1 year, which was valid w.e.f. 14.03.2017 to 13.03.2018 for his Red Colour vehicle/ E-Rickshaw Model UDAAN chassis no.M5LEEVUD17B000239, Motor No.EEVM-0239. He paid a sum of Rs.4644/- towards the yearly premium, and the assured value of his vehicle was Rs.94,700/- as per the said policy.
- The Complainant's E-Rickshaw was stolen on the intervening night of 17-18.12.2017 from Multani Dhana, Pahar Ganj, New Delhi. The incident was also captured in the CCTV installed in the street. Despite trying to locate his vehicle when he could not find it, the Complainant lodged a complaint on 18.12.2017, vide FIR No.040036 under section 379 IPC with the Police Station of Pahar Ganj, Distt. Central Delhi.
- The Complainant duly informed the OP about the theft of the vehicle and, per the OP official's instructions, filed claim no. 37328174, submitting all the requisite documents and both the original keys to them.
- The OP's surveyor, Mr. Shivam, made further queries, which the Complainant answered to the best of his ability. The Complainant claims that he paid a sum of Rs.5000/- to the surveyor for formalities as per his instruction but was not issued any receipt towards the same. The Complainant further claims that the surveyor also took his signatures on various papers without disclosing his intention or contents.
- Thereafter, the Police issued an untraced report dated 15.02.2018, which was submitted to the OP officials, but the OP did not process the Complainant's claim. On 16.03.2018, the OP repudiated his claim under the Exclusion Clause of the policy wherein the vehicle was being used for "Hire and Reward", which was in contravention of the Policy terms and conditions which the Complainant alleges that he did not receive.
- Thus, the Complainant filed the present complaint alleging deficiency in service under the Consumer Protection Act, paying for the claim amount of Rs.94,700/- refund of Rs.5,000/- paid to the surveyor, Rs.1 Lakh for the mental agony and suffering caused to him, and Rs.50,000/- towards litigation expenses.
- Notice was issued to the OP, who filed their reply stating that the Complainant had filed a false complaint before this Forum. The Complainant had hired the E-Rickshaw in question to one Sh. Vikas Kumar for Rs.400/- per day. On 17.12.2016, the E-Rickshaw was parked in front of Vikas Kumar's house in an unsecured open space. Thus, it was the negligence of Vikas Kumar due to which the theft took place.
- The very fact that the Complainant gave the E-Rickshaw on Hire to Sh. Vikas was in violation of the Terms and conditions of use as stated clearly in the Insurance Policy, which states-
-
Thus, the OPs were fully justified in rejecting the Complainant's claim. - The Complainant filed his rejoinder and affidavit in evidence, denying ever giving the vehicle on day-to-day hire to Mr. Vikas Kumar and reiterating the averments made by him in his complaint. The OP filed the affidavit of Ms. Sunita, General Manager, Claims, for the OP. The OP has filed Exhibit-R-1, which is the signed statement by the Complainant admitting that he gave the E-Rickshaw to one Vikas Kumar on a 'Hire and Reward' basis for Rs.400/- per day. Exhibit-R-2 is the written statement of Vikas Kumar with his signature, and Exhibit-R-3 is the investigation report by the investigator appointed by the OP. Exhibit-R-4 is the copy of the policy issued by the OP against the Complainant's vehicle with the exclusion clause that the Complainant violated, due to which his claim was rejected via letter dated 16.03.2018 (Exhibit-R-5).
- Further, the OP alleges that the refund of Rs.5000/- that the Complainant claims to have given to the surveyor as a bribe does not fall within the purview of the Consumer Protection Act and is an offence to be investigated by prevention of Money Laundering Act which he has admittedly committed.
- The OP has annexed the affidavit to be read as evidence of Sh. Rajesh Kumar of Baljeet Associates Insurance Investigators who states on record that the vehicle was used for hire & reward basis. Sh. Rajesh Kumar also states in his affidavit that a neighbour, Mr. Pawan Kumar (R-3), also confirmed through his written statement that the E-Rickshaw was hired by Mr. Vikas Kumar for Rs.400/- per day. Thereafter, he submitted his investigation report dated 25.01.2018 to the OP. Both parties proved the documents on record to substantiate their testimony.
- The Complainant and the OP filed their written arguments, and we have heard the contesting parties on the date fixed for final arguments. We have carefully reviewed the facts and circumstances of the present complaint and have perused the documents placed on record by the parties.
- We find that the Complainant owned an E-Rickshaw Model UDAAN chassis no.M5LEEVUD17B000239, Motor No.EEVM-0239. He insured the E-Rickshaw for 1 year, valid from 14.03.2017-13.03.2018, paying Rs.4644/- towards the yearly premium. The Complainant's E-Rickshaw was stolen in the intervening night of 17-18.12.2017. The E-Rickshaw was parked in front of house no.9627, Gali No.12, Mulatani Dhanda, Pahar Ganj, New Delhi.
- Despite efforts, his E-Rickshaw could not be found. He, therefore, lodged an FIR No.040036 dated 18.12.2017 under section 379 IPC with Police Station Pahar Ganj, Distt. Central, New Delhi. Thereafter, the Complainant filed a claim with the OP regarding his vehicle with all relevant documents and original keys, which was repudiated by the OP. The OP had deputed an investigator/ surveyor vide letter dated 16.03.2018 sent by the OP to the Complainant under the exclusion clause wherein the vehicles which are used for hire & reward are not payable under the policy terms and conditions.
- Further, the OP has filed the affidavit of Sh. Rajesh Kumar of Bajleet Associates Insurance Investigators to show that the Complainant had given the E-Rickshaw for Hire and Reward of Rs.400/- per day to one Sh. Vikas Kumar. The OP stated that the E-Rickshaw was stolen from the front of the house of Mr. Vikas Kumar, who had parked it in an unsecured open ground. The OP has also annexed the duly signed statements of the Complainant, the rentee, Sh. Vikas Kumar and a neighbour, Sh. Pawan Kumar, wherein they all stated that the E-Rickshaw was owned by the Complainant, and was being used by Sh. Vikas Kumar for Rs.400/- per day.
- The Complainant has claimed that the surveyor made him sign some papers, but he was unaware of the contents of the documents he was signing. But his averment cannot be taken at face value as the letter/ statement he wrote is detailed and precise.
- He has clarified in his signed statement that he has a battery rickshaw No.DL6ER0894 was used by Vikas Kumar. The Complainant had given the Battery Rickshaw at Rs.400/- per day on rent to Vikas Kumar to use. On 17.12.2017 at approx. 4.00 PM in the evening, the Battery Rickshaw was parked in front of Vikas Kumar's house. But, on 18.12.2017, at 3:30 AM, the Complainant did not find the Battery Rickshaw there. He tried to find the same, but when he could not locate the rickshaw, he called and informed the Police about the theft at 100 number and later lodged an FIR at Pahar Ganj Police Station.
- This signed written statement/letter, which the Complainant has mentioned in his testimony as the documents the surveyor got signed from him without his knowledge about its contents, leaves no doubt in our mind and is sufficient to prove that the Complainant had rented his E-Rickshaw for 'Hire and Reward' to one Sh. Vikas Kumar at Rs.400/- per day, which falls within the Exclusion Clause in the terms and conditions of the policy he had taken from the OP.
- So far as the bribe of Rs.5000/-, the Complainant claims he had given to one Mr. Shivam, the surveyor of his claim. We find no documentary proof or evidence of any payment made by the Complainant to this effect filed on record.
- In light of the discussion above, we do not find any merit in the present complaint and hence dismiss the same without costs.
- A copy of this order is to be sent to all the parties as per rule.
- File be consigned to record room.
- Announced in the open court on 14.03.2024.
| |
