DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BHIWANI.

                                                                                CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO.291 OF 2015.

                                                            DATE OF INSTITUTION: 14.10.2015.

                                                            DATE OF ORDER: 22.11.2017

Rajbir son of Mahender Singh, resident of village Tiwala, Tehsil Charkhi Dadri, District Bhiwani.

                                                          ………Complainant.

                   Versus

1. L & T General Insurance Company Limited, Registered Office L & T House, NM Marg, Balad Estate, Mumbai through Managing Director.

1. L & T Insurance Company Serving Branch 6^th Floor, DCM Building, Barahkhamba Road, New Delhi.

1. M/s Bharat Tractors, Authorized Dealer Sonalika Tractor, Delhi Road, Auto Market, Charkhi Dadri, District Bhiwani.

………Opposite Parties.

   COMPLAINT U/S 12 OF THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,

BEFORE:          Shri Rajesh Jindal, President.

Shri Parmod Kumar, Member.

Present:             Shri Hemant Sharma, Advocate for complainant.

                        Shri A. Sardana, Advocate for Opposite Parties no. 1 & 2.

                        OP no. 3 exparte.

ORDER:-

RAJESH JINDAL, President:

                   In brief, the case of the complainant is that the tractor of the complainant was insured with the OPs no. 1 & 2 for a sum of Rs. 498750/-.  It is alleged that the tractor of the complainant was stolen on 9.8.2014 and FIR No. 447 under Section 379 IPC was registered with the concerned police station on 9.8.2014. The complainant also intimated the OP no. 1 & 2 regarding the theft of his tractor for claim but to no avail  The complainant further alleged that due to the act and conduct of the OPs, he has to suffer mental agony, physical harassment and financial loss.  Hence, it amounts to deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties and as such he had to file the present complaint.

2.                Opposite parties no. 1 & 2 on appearance filed written statement alleging therein that the complainant has failed to furnish required documents to the answering opposite party and ultimately with no option left, the answering respondent had to close the claim on the ground of non-submissions of the documents.  It is submitted that on 9.8.2014 intimation about the theft was given to the answering respondent and complainant failed to comply with the aforesaid letters and had not submitted the final report issued under Section 173 Cr.P.C. duly accepted by the court the claim was closed.  It is submitted that the answering respondent has rightly repudiated the claim of the complainant and hence answering respondent is not liable to pay any compensation to the complainant.  Hence, in view of the circumstances mentioned above, there is no deficiency in service on the part of Ops and the complaint of the complainant is liable to be dismissed against respondents with costs.

3.                OP no. 3 has failed to come present.  Hence he was proceeded against exparte vide order dated 9.2.2017.

4.                In order to make out his case, the complainant has tendered into the evidence documents Annexure C-1 to Annexure C-4 along with supporting affidavit.

5.                We have gone through the record of the case carefully and have heard the learned counsels for the parties.

6.                   Learned Counsel for the complainant reiterated the contents of the complaint.  He submitted that the tractor of the complainant was insured with the OPs no. 1 & 2 for a sum of Rs. 498750/-.  The tractor of the complainant was stolen on 9.8.2014 and FIR No. 447 under Section 379 IPC was registered with the concerned police station on 9.8.2014. The complainant also intimated the OP no. 1 & 2 regarding the theft of his tractor.

7.                Learned Counsel for the Ops no. 1 & 2 reiterated the contents of the reply.   He submitted that despite repeated letters of the OPs no. 1 & 2, the complainant failed to provide the final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C., duly accepted by the Court.  He submitted that vide letter dated 30.3.2016 Annexure IV, the complainant failed to furnish the final report.  Hence the claim file of the complainant was closed as “No Claim”.

8.                The material facts of the case are undisputed.  The claim of the complainant has not been settled by the OP for want of final report.  The complainant has produced the final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. duly accepted by the learned court Charkhi Dadri vide order dated 4.4.2016. Considering the facts of the case, we allow the complaint of the complainant against the OPs no. 1 & 2.  The complainant is directed to provide the final report to the OPs no. 1 & 2 immediately and the OPs no. 1 & 2 are directed to pay the insured amount of Rs. 498750/- to the complainant within 45 days from the date of furnishing the final report by the complainant, otherwise, thereafter, the OPs no. 1 & 2 shall be liable to pay the insured amount alongwith interest at the rate of 8 per cent per annum till the payment of the award amount to the complainant.  Certified copies of the order be sent to the parties free of costs.  File be consigned to the record room, after due compliance.

Announced in open Forum.

Dated: 22.11.2017.                                                                           (Rajesh Jindal)

                                                                                                President,      

                                                                                    District Consumer Disputes

                                                                                    Redressal Forum, Bhiwani.

(Parmod Kumar)                  

                  Member.