Per Shri S.R. Khanzode – Hon’ble Presiding Judicial Member:

     Heard parties present.  Other Respondents absent.

     Appellant failed to pay cost and also to issue notice to Respondent No.3 as per direction dated 02.08.2010 and 09.09.2010.  It appears from record that matter is fixed for hearing on admission.  Therefore, we preferred to hear the parties present on admission. 

     This appeal takes an exception to an order dated 10.03.2008, passed in Consumer complaint No.64/2007, Shri Premlal N. Ratan V/s. M/s.India Insurance Co. Ltd. and others, by District consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Additional Thane. 

     It is the case of the Appellant/Complainant that he had insured his motor lorry and attached trolly with Respondent/Opposite Party No.1 – New India Assurance Co. Ltd.  On 02.05.2006 the trolly attached to the motor lorry was stolen by one Kuldeep Singh and for which the police complaint was filed with Uran Police Station.  Insurance claim was thereafter made.  Insurance Company repudiated the claim stating that the only motor lorry was insured and not trolly.  Feeling aggrieved by the said repudiation, the consumer complaint was lodged.  Consumer complaint stood dismissed and therefore, this appeal is preferred by the original Complainant.

     Forum below rightly considered the material placed before it and upholding the contentions of the Insurance Company based upon the statement of the driver of the vehicle that the trolly was not stolen, but, was taken in possession by one Kuldeep Singh.  Insurance Company also stated that trolly which appears to be stolen was not at all insured.  Insurance document supports such contention.  In the circumstances, we find no reason to take different view than what has been taken by the Forum below and thus, finding the appeal devoid of any substance, we pass the following order:

O  R  D  E  R

     Appeal is not admitted and stands rejected accordingly with no order as to costs.