Haryana

Yamunanagar

CC/380/2012

Kailash Chand S/o Des Raj - Complainant(s)

Versus

IFFCOn TOKIO General Insurance Company Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

S.P.Dhanda

26 May 2017

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, YAMUNA NAGAR

                                                                 

Complaint No. 380 of 2012

Date of institution: 16.04.2012

Date of decision: 26.05.2017

Kailash Chand aged about 52 yerars, Son of Shri Des Raj, since deceased represented through his Legal Representative Shanta Devi widow of Late Kailash Chand, resident of VPO Tazewala, Tehsil Chhachhrauli, District Yamuna Nagar.

                                                                                                                            …Complainant.
                    Versus

1.    IFFCO TOKIO General Insurance Company Ltd. Plot No.2B and C, Sector 28-A, Madhya Marg, Chandigarh, 160002 through its Manager/authorized signatory.

2.    IFFCO TOKIO General Insurance Company Ltd. IFFCO House, Third Floor, 34, Nehru Place, New Delhi through its Manager/authorized signatory.
                                                                                

                                                                                                                            …Respondents.

 

BEFORE:     SH. ASHOK KUMAR GARG…………….. PRESIDENT.
                      SH. S.C.SHARMA………………………….MEMBER.
                      Smt. Veena Rani Sheokand……………… MEMBER

Present:       Shri SP Dhanda, Advocate for complainant.
                     Shri Karnesh Sharma, Advocate for OPs.

ORDER (ASHOK KUMAR GARG, PRESIDENT)

 

1.        The present complaint filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act. 1986, was previously filed by Shri Kailash Chand. However, lateron due to his death on 10.02.2015 his widow being LR was impleaded vide order dated 16.12.2015

.
2.        Brief facts of the complaint, as alleged in the complaint, are that the complainant is registered owner of the Tractor bearing Registration No.HR02-R-8508 make Sonalika-750, Model 2007 which was insured with the respondent (hereinafter referred as OPs) Insurance company for a sum insured of IDV of Rs.3,22,000/- vide policy bearing No.70062798 valid from 28.06.2009 to 27.06.2010. Unfortunately, the tractor trolley of the complainant was stolen in the night of 27.01.2010 and 28.01.2010 from the house of the complainant at Tazewala. An FIR bearing No.14 dated 28.01.2010 under Section 379 IPC was registered in the police Khizrabad, District Yamuna Nagar. The complainant also immediately informed the OP Insurance company regarding the theft of his motor cycle and lodged the claim and submitted all the documents with the OPs Insurance Company. It has been further mentioned that the tractor trolley of the complainant has not been traced out by the police and the complainant has made so many requests to pay the sum insured of the tractor trolley in question but the OPs failed to pay the same which constitute the deficiency in service on unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs Insurance company. Lastly prayed for directing the OPs to pay an amount of Rs.3,22,000/- along with interest and also to pay compensation as well as litigation expenses.

3.        Upon notice, OPs Insurance company appeared and filed its written statement taking some preliminary objection such as complaint is not maintainable; complaint is bad for non joinder and mis joinder of necessary parties; complainant has no locus standi; to file the present complaint the claim of the complainant was not paid and the same was closed as "No Claim" on the ground that the complainant failed to comply with the repeated request letters and reminders of the OPs Insurance company dated 14.06.2010, 26.07.2010, 07.10.2011 and 06.02.2012 (Annexure R-1 to R-4) and failed to supply untrace report issued by Court/report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. and on merit it has been admitted that complainant had purchased an insurance policy from the OP Insurance Company and insured  his tractor bearing engine No.111016 and chassis No.110234/3  for a sum insured of Rs.3,22,000/-  valid from 28.06.2009 to 27.06.2010 subject to terms and conditions mentioned in the policy. It has been further admitted that on receiving the intimation regarding the alleged theft of the said tractor, the OPs Insurance company immediately registered the claim and deputed Grover Associates for facts finding investigations. The said investigator submitted his report on 14.03.2010 and during the investigation, the said investigator sent request letters to complainant dated 08.02.2010 and 24.02.2010 (Annexure R-7 and R-8)  requesting to the complainant to supply the report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. and untrace report issued by Hon'ble Judicial Court but the complainant failed to supply the same. After receiving the report from the investigator, the OPs Insurance Company also issued so many requests letter on dated 14.06.2010, 26.07.2010, 07.10.2011 and 06.02.2012 (Annexure R-1 to R-4) but the complainant failed to comply the same, so the claim of the complainant was closed as " No Claim". Rest contents of the complainant were denied and lastly prayed for dismissal of the complainant.

4.        In support of his case, complainant tendered into evidence her affidavit as Annexure CW/A, photocopy of insurance cover note as Annexure C-1, photocopy of Registration Certificate of Tractor bearing No.HR02-R-8508 as Annexure C-2, photocopy of repudiation letter dated 06.02.2012 as Annexure C-3, photocopy of FIR No.14 dated 28.01.2010 as Annexure C-4 and closed her evidence.

5.        On the other hand, Learned counsel for the OPs Insurance Company tendered into evidence affidavit of Er. KL Grover, Grover Associates (Investigator) as Annexure R-A, affidavit of Pallavi Rai, Vice President IFFCO TOKIO as Annexure R-B, photocopy of letter dated 14.06.2010 as Annexure R-1, letter dated 26.07.2011 as Annexure R-2, photocopy of letter dated 07.10.2011 as Annexure R-3, photocopy of repudiation letter dated 06.02.2012 as Annexure R-4, photocopy of insurance policy as Annexure R-5, photocopy of investigator report dated 14.03.2010 as Annexure R-6, photocopy of letter dated 08.02.2010 issued by Grover Associates (Investigator) dated 08.02.2010 as Annexure R-7 letter dated 24.02.2010 as Annexure R-8 and closed the evidence on behalf of OPs Insurance Company.

6.        We have heard the learned counsel for parties and have gone through the pleadings as well as documents placed on the file very carefully and minutely.

7.        It is not disputed that complainant was registered owner of the Tractor bearing Registration No.HR02-R-8508 bearing engine No.409 5F 72 B 111016 and chassis No.MZZSY 110234/3 was stolen on 27/28-01.2010 which was insured with the OPs Insurance company vide policy bearing No.70062798 valid from 28.06.2009 to 27.06.2010 and the same was stolen in the night of 27.01.2010 and 28.01.2010 from the house of the complainant at Tazewala, which is duly evident from the photocopy of RC, Insurance Policy and copy of FIR (Annexure C-1, C2 and C-4) respectively.

8.        The only version of the complainant is that the OP Insurance Company has wrongly and illegally repudiated the claim of the complainant as "No Claim" vide letter dated 06.02.2012 (Annexure C-3/R-4) and argued as per latest law there was no necessity to submit the untrace report and reiterated the version taken in the complaint. Lastly, prayed for acceptance of the complaint.
9.        On the other hand, learned counsel for the OPs insurance company argued at length that despite so many letters dated 08.02.2010 and 24.02.2010 issued by the investigators (Annexure R-7 and R-8) and after that letter and reminder issued by the OP Insurance Company on dated 14.06.2010, 26.07.2010, 07.10.2011 (Annexure R-1 to R-3) complainant failed to submit report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. /untrace report issued by Illaqa Magistrate, so the claim of the complainant was rightly repudiated by the OPs Insurance Company vide letter dated 06.02.2012 (Annexure R-4) and prayed for dismissal of the complainant as there was no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs.

10.        After hearing both the parties, we are of the considered view that there is no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs Insurance Company as from the perusal of various letters issues by Investigator (Annexure R-7 and R-8) and after that letter issued by the OPs Insurance Company dated 14.06.2010, 26.07.2010 and 07.10.2011 (Annexure R-1 to R-3), it is duly evident that complainant has totally failed to submit the report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. /untrace report issued by Illaqa Magistrate.

11.        We have gone through the contents of the complaint, but the complainant has totally failed to disclose any date or month on which he submitted the untrace report/report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. with the OP Insurance Company. Even, till today since from filing the complaint on dated 16.04.2012, complainant has not placed on file any copy of report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. or untrace report issued by police or Illaqa Magistrate despite the fact that the claim of the complainant was repudiated by the OPs Insurance Company on this ground, due to the reason best known to him. In the absence of untrace report, it cannot be presumed that tractor in question has not recovered by the official of the P.S. Khizrabad where the FIR was registered. In the cases of theft, the untrace report/report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. is an essential document and without this document either issued by the police or any Illaqa Magistrate, the OP Insurance Company cannot decide the claim. The case law referred by the counsel for the complainant is not disputed but not helpful as in that case only untrace report issued by the Competent Court of law was not submitted but it was not the case that no report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. was issued by the police. But in the present case, the complainant has neither placed on file nor submit with the OP Insurance Company the untrace report or report under Section 173 Cr.P.C..

12.        In the circumstances noted above, we are of the considered view that there is no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs Insurance company and claim of the complainant has been rightly repudiated as "No Claim" vide letter dated 06.02.2012 (Annexure R-4). However, in the interest of justice and to decide the controversy between the parties it would be appropriate to direct the complaint to submit the report under section 173 Cr.P.C. or untrace report issued by competent court of law with the OPs Insurance company within a period of one month and after that OPs Insurance Company is also directed to settle the claim of the complainant within next two months from the filing of the untrace report/under Section 173 Cr.P.C. issued by Competent Court of law.

13.        Resultantly, we dispose of the present complaint in accordance with the above noted directions with no order as to cost. Copies of this order be supplied to the parties concerned as per rules. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Pronounced in open court:
Dated: 26.05.2017.

                                                                                          

                                     

                                                                                      ( ASHOK KUMAR GARG)

                                                                                      PRESIDENT  

                                                                                      DCDRF,YAMUNANAGAR      

                                                                                                                                                                        

                        (VEENA RANI SHEOKAND)          (S.C.SHARMA)

                        MEMBER                                            MEMBER