Haryana

Yamunanagar

CC/177/2014

Madan Mohan s/o Sita Ram - Complainant(s)

Versus

IFFCO TOKIO General Insurance Co.Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Kaushal Kalyan

22 Sep 2015

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, YAMUNA   NAGAR

                                                                                              Complaint No. 177  of  2014.

                                                                                              Date of institution: 1.4.2014

                                                                                              Date of decision: 22.9.2015.

Madan Mohan son of Shri Sita Ram resident of H. No. 185, Bharat Sewak Nagar, Buria Chowk, Jagadhri, District Yamuna Nagar.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   …Complainant.

                                    Versus

1.         Iffco Tokio General Insurance Co. Ltd. Shop No. 07, Buria Chowk, Jagadhri, District Yamuna Nagar ( Haryana) through its Branch Manager/Authorized personl

 

2.         Iffco Tokio General Ins. Company Ltd. Iffco Sadan C-1, Distt. Centre, Saket, New Delhi-11017 through its General Manager/ M.D.     

 

                                                                                                                                                                               … Opposite parties

 

                   

CORAM:         SH. ASHOK KUMAR GARG, PRESIDENT

                        SH. S.C.SHARMA, MEMBER.

 

Present: Sh. Kaushal Kalyan, Advocate, counsel for complainant.   

              Sh. Karnesh Sharma, Advocate, counsel for OPs. 

 

ORDER

 

1.                     Complainant Madan Mohan filed this complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 seeking directions to the OPs to pay an amount of Rs. 33,300/- on account of theft of his motorcycle bearing registration No. HR-02V/6534 and further to pay Rs. 50,000/- as compensation and Rs. 10,000/- as cost of proceedings.   

2.                     Brief facts of the complaint are that complainant had obtained insurance policy bearing No. 1-1ZOG7HI P400 / 83385723 valid from 21.3.2013 to 20.3.2014 for his motorcycle bearing No. HR-02V-6534 against the payment of premium from the OPs. It has been further stated that the aforesaid insurance policy covered the risk of theft also. It is further alleged that on 27.5.2013 complainant had parked his motorcycle in question in front of house of Mukesh Shoes Maker in Bharat Sewak Nagar, Jagadhri   and found that his Motor Cycle was stolen by unknown person and regarding this an intimation was given to the OPs and told the incident to OPs. The complainant has also got registered a FIR bearing No. 257 dated 4.6.2013 under section 379 IPC with P.S.City Jagadhri in this regard. The police tried their best level to trace out the motorcycle in question but failed. Ultimately the Police submitted untraceable report of said motorcycle before the Court of Illaqua Magistrate, Jagadhri. The complainant submitted the claim documents of said vehicle to the OPs which are required for passing the claim amount of motorcycle in question. The OPs issued three letters to the complainant to fulfill requirements/documents and as per their letters he submitted all the required documents to the OPs for getting the claim amount but the complainant has been running from pillar to post and also visited the office of OPs but they did not pay any heed to the genuine request of the complainant. The complainant got issued a legal notice dated 7.3.2014 through his counsel but to no effect. Inspite of all, OPs failed to settle the genuine claim, hence there is a great deficiency in service on the part of OPs and complainant is entitled to get the insured amount of Rs. 33,300/- alongwith compensation and litigation expenses as prayed above. Hence, this complaint.

3.                     Upon notice, OPs Iffco Tokio General Insurance Co. Ltd.  appeared and filed written statement by taking some preliminary objections such as maintainability, complainant has not come before this Forum with clean hands, bad for non joinder and mis joinder of necessary parties and on merit it has been mentioned that the claim of the complainant has already been approved by the competent authority for Rs. 26040/- subject to compliance of requisite formalities i.e. Original Certificate duly transferred in favour of Iffco Tokio General Insurance Co. Ltd. Letter of Subrogation on judicial stamp paper of Rs. 100/- duly notarized in the format enclosed), Discharge Voucher duly signed by complainant and the financer, if applicable. It has been further mentioned that the OP company processed the claim of complainant expeditiously and was approved by the competent authority of the OP company and the complainant was informed accordingly vide letter dated 3.4.2014 (Annexure R-1) with further request to furnish the necessary documents and to complete the requisite formalities vide letter dated 3.4.2014. Inspite of complying with the letter, the complainant preferred to file the present false complaint with malafide intention to fulfill his evil design and to harass the OP company. Lastly prayed that the complainant failed to comply with the letter dated 3.4.2014  hence there is no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of OP and complaint is liable to be dismissed.  

4.                     To prove his case, counsel for the complainant  has tendered into evidence affidavit of complainant as Annexure CX and documents such as Annexure C-1 Photo copy of Legal Notice dated 7.3.2014, Annexure C-2 Acknowledgement, Annexure C-3 Photo copy of Registration Certificate, Annexure C-4 Photo copy of FIR No. 257 dated 4.6.2013, Annexure C-5 Photo copy of Insurance Cover Note, Annexure C-6 Photo copy of cash/Credit memo, Annexure C-7 Photo copy of letter dated 3.7.2013, Annexure C-8 Photo copy of request letter dated 21.11.2013, Annexure -9 Photo copy of reminder/ letter dated 18.1.2014, Annexure C-10 Photo copy of untraceable report, Annexure C-11 Photo copy of report of police dated 31.1.2014and closed the evidence on behalf of complainant.

 5.                    On the other hand, counsel for the OP has tendered into evidence affidavit of Pallavi Rai, Vice President, IFFCO TOKIO General Insurance Co. as Annexure RX and document such as Annexure R-1 Photo copy of letter dated 3.4.2014 and closed the evidence on behalf of OP.

6.                     We have heard the learned counsel for both the parties and have gone through the pleadings as well as documents placed on file minutely & carefully.  Learned counsel for the complainant reiterated the averments made in the complaint and prayed for its acceptance whereas the counsel for the opposite party reiterated the averments made in the reply and prayed for its dismissal.

7.                     It is admitted fact that the complainant was registered owner of the motorcycle bearing registration No. HR-02V-6534 and it was insured with the OP vide policy bearing No. 1-1ZOG7HI P400 / 83385723 valid from 21.3.2013 to 20.3.2014 for Rs. 33,300/- which was stolen by some unknown person on 27.5.2013 within the insured period. It is also admitted that regarding theft of Motor Cycle an FIR No. 257 dated 4.6.2013 was lodged with the police of P.S. City Jagadhri.  Learned counsel for the OP has argued that OP issued a letter dated 3.4.2014 in which complainant was asked to submit Original Registration Certiificate, Letter of Subrogation, Discharge Voucher duly signed by complainant and financier and NOC from the financier for transferred registration certificate in the name of OP company of the Motor Cycle in question and despite this letter the complainant has not submitted these documents. Hence the claim of the complainant could not be settled.

8.                     On the other hand, counsel for the complainant argued that original registration certificate of the motorcycle in question was also stolen with the motorcycle as the same was in the box of motorcycle. It has been further argued by the counsel for the complainant that he has already submitted untraceable report issued by court on 22.1.2014 demanded vide letter dated 21.11.2013. Learned counsel for the complainant further argued that the OP has stated that the claim has been approved by the competent authority for Rs. 26040/- which it is evident from letter dated 3.4.2014 (Annexure R-1) issued by the OP as in this letter only transferred Registration Certificate has been demanded by the OP. Meaning thereby that all other documents earlier sought were either already received or were not required. Learned counsel for the complainant has further stated that as the claim of the complainant was found genuine by the investigator, hence, OP has not filed report of investigator due to malafidly intention and even no insurance policy with its terms and conditions has been filed before this Forum.

 9.                    The only contention of the OP is that the complainant has not submitted the registration certificate transferred in the name of Insurance Company, hence, claim of the complainant has not been settled but this contention of the opposite party has no force to our mind. Because, firstly when the original registration certificate of the motorcycle in question had already been stolen with the motorcycle then how the complainant can get transfer the registration certificate in the name of OP i.e. Iffco Tokio Ltd. and secondly, the OP totally failed to release the genuine claim of the complainant and without releasing the claim of complainant then how OP can demand for transfer of registration certificate of his motorcycle in its name i.e. OP. Moreover, the OP demanded discharge voucher duly fore-closed loan, if applicable, whereas from the perusal of registration Certificate it is clear that no loan has been taken by the complainant from any financer. Therefore, to our mind, there is nothing material for bent of which, genuine claim of the complainant, either cannot be settled or can be repudiated, therefore, it is a very clear that non settling the genuine claim of the complainant is totally unjustified. It is certainly deficiency in service on the part of the OP. As such there is a great deficiency in service on the part of OP for withholding the genuine claim of the complainant without any cogent reason.

10.                   From the perusal of the insurance policy Ex. C-5 it is evident that the insured declared value of the motorcycle in question has been shown as 33,300/- at the time of issuance of the policy in question and an amount of Rs. 901.27 has been charged on this account whereas OPs has approved the claim of complainant to the tune of Rs. 26040/- which is evident from Annexure R-1. Learned counsel for the OPs has totally failed to convince this Forum how the OPs has calculated this amount i.e. Rs. 26040/- instead of insured declared value of Rs. 33,300/-. Hence, the contention of the OPs on this point is not tenable and the complainant is entitled to get the IDV of the motorcycle in question.

11.                   Resultantly, we partly allow the complaint of complainant and direct the OPs to pay a sum of Rs. 33,300/- - to the complainant as insured amount of motorcycle in question within 30 days from the date of this order failing which OPs will liable to pay interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of complaint till its realization. The OPs are further directed to pay a sum of Rs. 3000/- as compensation for mental agony, harassment and further to pay a sum of Rs. 2000/- as litigation expenses subject to submit the letter of subrogation, letter of indemnify on non judicial stamp paper before receiving the aforesaid awarded amount. Copies of this order be supplied to the parties concerned free of costs as per rules. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced in open court.

22.9.2015.

                                                                                          ( ASHOK KUMAR GARG)

                                                                                           PRESIDENT

 

                                                                                          (S.C.SHARMA)

                                                                                           MEMBER