Delhi

New Delhi

CC/1407/2008

Naresh Kumar Sunil Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S. The New India Assurance Company Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

20 Oct 2015

ORDER

CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-VI

(DISTT. NEW DELHI), ‘M’ BLOCK, 1^STFLOOR,

VIKAS BHAWAN, I.P.ESTATE,

NEW DELHI-110002.

 

Case No.CC/1407/08                            Dated:

In the matter of:

Sh. Naresh Kumar Sunil Kumar,

A partnership firm having its office at:

B-1087, Shastri Nagar, Delhi

……..COMPLAINANT

       

VERSUS

M/s. The New India Assurance Co. Ltd.,

H-101, 2^nd Floor, Connaught Place, New Delhi-01

                                         ……. OPPOSITE PARTY

 

ORDER

President: C.K Chaturvedi

               

The short case of the complainant is that it was partnership firm, which had a taken a money policy from loss of money in transit from shop to office etc. The amount in transit estimated per annum was Rs.4 crore.

It is alleged that on 23.10.08, when the firm’s employee Mr. Divesh Kumar, Salesman with partner of Firm Sunil Kumar were booking order and collecting money against goods delivered on scooter no.DL-8SAC-7201. Mr. Dinesh Collected cash of Rs.1,66,917/- and kept in a bag in dickey of scooter. He found this bag missing from the dickey, by manipulation of lock. He reported the matter to police & OP. The surveyor to verify the facts of loss, however, the insurance company repudiated the claim on the ground that money in transit had exhausted as amount of money in transit so far was 4.6 crore. The OP in its reply has reiterated the same position to justify the rejection of claim.

We have considered the rival case and perused the repudiation letter. It states that total amount collected from market was Rs.4.6 crore and amount collected from office was Rs.4.6 crore, amounting to total of Rs.9.2 crore, which was beyond Rs.4 crore per annum of insured amount in transit per annum. We are totally unable to understand the approach of OP. The sum insured in transit as 4 crore per annum cannot be taken as condition of policy to say that money in transit cannot be more. The facts of loss in the particular incident, has nothing to do with money estimated to be in transit or turnover per annum. The OP has acted totally arbitrary and not explaining to us reasoning behind their logic. It is however, seen from copy of FIR that the loss reported in theft is Rs.1,26,367/- and not Rs.1,66,917/-. The Surveyor has rightly relied on figure of Rs.1,26,367/-.

We hold OP responsible for deficiency ins service, and direct OP to pay loss of Rs.1,26,367/- with interest @ 9% per annum and pay to complainant a sum of Rs.20,000/- for harassment and litigation expenses.

The order shall be complied with within 30 days of the receipt of the copy of the order; otherwise action can be taken against OP under Section 25 / 27 of the Consumer Protection Act.

File be consigned to record room.

Copy of the order be sent to the parties free of cost.

 

        Pronounced in open Court 20.10.2015.

 

 

(C.K.CHATURVEDI)

PRESIDENT

 

 

(Ritu Garodia)

MEMBER