Haryana

Yamunanagar

CC/113/2021

Aabida W/o Abdul Rehman - Complainant(s)

Versus

Iffco Tokio General Insurance Co.Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

S.S.Saini

09 Nov 2023

ORDER

CC No.113 of 2021.

Aabida     Vs.   IFFCO TOKIO.

 

Present:       Sh. SS Saini, Adv. for the complainant.

                    Sh. Rajiv Kumar Gupta, Adv. for the opponent.

                    

                   Complainant has not done the compliance of order dated 20.03.2023, vide which the complainant was asked to furnish proof regarding final acceptance of police report by Judicial Magistrate concerned, regarding case FIR No.192 dated 30.09.2016, Police Station Chhachhrauli, District Yamuna Nagar. Without touching to the merit of the complaint, briefly, the complainant was the registered owner of Truck bearing registration No.HR58-A/4223 (for short truck), which was insured with the opponent vide insurance policy Ex.C2 for the period 12.05.2016 o 11.05.2017 and during the validity period of insurance policy, the truck was stolen from the territorial jurisdiction of PS Chhachhrauli and FIR No.192 dated 30.09.2016, was registered. The complainant lodged claim with the opponent under the policy which was not settled. Since, it is a matter of theft of a insured vehicle, when matter is referred to the police, there are two things, either, stolen vehicle will be recovered and the thief will be arrested and prosecution will be launched against his/her or police may not able to find any clue about the stolen vehicle, in that eventuality, police will submit untraced report to the Judicial Magistrate concerned and said Judicial Magistrate again has discretion, either to accept the police report or the reject it with the direction to the police for further investigation. Come what may, the acceptance of police report by a Judicial Magistrate is very much necessary for seeking claim from the insurance company. This Commission vide its order dated 20.03.2023 gave time to the complainant to produce the proof regarding cancellation of FIR No.192 dated 30.09.2016 and thereafter, complainant availed number of opportunities and more than reasonable time, but failed to do the compliance of order dated 20.03.2023. There must be an end to such type of adjournments, because adjournment cannot be granted ad-infinitum. Further request for adjournment made by counsel for the complainant, to comply with the order dated 20.03.2023 is declined and without commenting on the merits of the case, the complaint is dismissed, being not maintainable, due to non compliance of order dated 20.03.2023, with regard to acceptance of police report qua the FIR No.192 dated 30.09.2016, Police Station Chhachhrauli, District Yamuna Nagar, by the Judicial Magistrate concerned. However, in future, if the complainant furnish the proof with regard to acceptance of untraced report of the police qua FIR No.192 dated 30.09.2016, Police Station Chhachhrauli, District Yamuna Nagar by the Judicial Magistrate concerned, then, she shall be at liberty to file the afresh complaint, if advised so, and in afresh complaint, she will disclose the particulars of the present complaint and its fate and will attach the copy of this order with the proposed would be fresh complaint. Parties are left to bear their own costs of litigation. File be consigned to the records.

 

 

                                                                                                                        President

                                L. Member                     Member                                   DCDRC, YNR,

09.11.2023.

 

Typed by: Jitender Sharma, Steno-typist