BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, AMRITSAR.

Consumer Complaint No. 160 of 2015

Date of Institution: 13.03.2015

Date of Decision: 21.12.2015

M/s.Global Computers, Shop No. 92-GF, Nehru Shopping Complex, Lawrence Road, Amritsar through its proprietor Mr.Vishal Chopra.

Complainant

Versus

National Insurance Company Limited, through is Chairman/ Managing Director/ Principle Officer, service through its Branch Office at 93, District Shopping Complex, Ranjit Avenue, Amritsar through is Branch Manager.   

Opposite Party

Complaint under section 12 & 13  of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as amended upto date.

Present: For the Complainant: None for the complainant.

              For the Opposite Party: Sh.  S.K.Davesar, Advocate.

Quorum:

Sh.Bhupinder Singh, President

Ms.Kulwant Kaur Bajwa, Member

Mr.Anoop Sharma, Member     

Order dictated by:

Sh.Bhupinder Singh, President.

1. Present complaint has been filed by Global Computers through its proprietor Mr.Vishal Chopra under the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act alleging therein that  he got his motor cycle bearing registration No.PB-02-BJ-8266 covering risk w.e.f. 21.7.2010 to 20.7.2011  insured from Opposite Party by paying premium of Rs.1025/-, for a Insured Declared Value of Rs.38,375/-. Complainant alleges that unfortunately,  the vehicle of the complainant got stolen on 3.5.2011 and due information was given  in writing to the concerned police authorities and the case was treated in the matter pertaining to FIR No. 65 dated 3.5.2011. Accordingly, the Opposite Party asked the complainant to file Non Traceable Report from police authorities alongwith other formalities and the complainant completed all the formalities as asked for. All the necessary formalities and documents i.e. original Registration Certificate, original insurance policy cover note, complaint and police report, untraceable report, two original keys of the stolen vehicle, etc. had been submitted to the Opposite Party by the complainant in presence of Deepak Kumar in the month of August, 2011. Thereafter, the complainant is making futile visits to the Opposite Party, but the Opposite Party has not paid the genuine claim of the complainant of the IDV of Rs.38,375. However, the Opposite Party vide its letter dated 18.3.2013 had repudiated the genuine claim of the complainant on frivolous  ground that the complainant has not  responded after three reminders, but the Opposite Party failed to mention in the said repudiation letter what they had asked for and what has not been complied with.  Alleging the same to be deficiency in service, complaint was filed seeking directions to the opposite party to pay the amount of Rs.38,375/- alongwith interest @ 12% per annum from 3.5.2011 till realization. Compensation and litigation expenses were also demanded.
2. On notice, Opposite Party appeared and filed written version in which it was submitted that the complainant has not furnished any documents as demanded from him vide various letters more particularly, letters dated 26.8.2011, 4.11.2011, 23.3.2012, 17.12.2012 and as such, Opposite Party was having no option except to close the claim file  as No Claim and even in respect thereof, the complainant was apprised vide letter dated 18.3.2013. Opposite Party further alleges that without prejudice  to the rights of the Opposite Party, it is pertinent to mention that even in case of  theft of vehicle, the complainant was under obligation to execute power of attorney, letter of subrogation and transfer of RC, etc. in favour of Opposite Party as envisaged under the law.   While denying and controverting other allegations, dismissal of complaint was prayed.
3. Complainant tendered into evidence his affidavit Ex.CW1/A alongwith documents Ex.C2 to Ex.C5, affidavit of Deepak Kumar Ex.CW2/A and closed the evidence on behalf of the complainant.
4. Opposite Party tendered into evidence affidavit of Sh.H.S.Chawla, Senior Divisional Manager Ex.OP1 alongwith documents Ex.OP2 to ExOP7 and closed the evidence on behalf of the Opposite Party.
5. We have carefully gone through the pleadings of the parties; arguments advanced by the ld.counsel for the parties and have appreciated the evidence produced on record by both the parties with the valuable assistance of the ld.counsel for both the parties.
6. From the record i.e. pleadings of the parties and the evidence produced on record by the parties, it is clear that the complainant got his motor cycle bearing registration No.PB-02-BJ-8266 insured with Opposite Party vide insurance cover Ex.C3 for the period w.e.f. 21.7.2010 to 20.7.2011  with Insured Declared Value of Rs.38,375/-. Said  motor cycle was stolen by some unknown person on 3.5.2011. Information was given to the concerned authorities vide complaint dated 3.5.2011 Ex.C4 on which the police noted its pleadings and tagged the same with FIR No. 65 dated 3.5.2011 at P.S.A Division, Amritsar. Opposite Party was also informed immediately. The police could not trace out the motor cycle of the complainant and issued untraced certificate dated 8.8.2011 Ex.C5. Claim was lodged with Opposite Party. Opposite Party wrote letter dated 26.8.2011 Ex.OP2 to the complainant demanding duplicate RC, NCRB report, untraced report under section 173 Cr.PC duly accepted by Judicial Magistrate. The complainant has submitted all the documents which were in his possession, but the Opposite Party closed the case of the complainant on the ground that despite so many letters/ reminders, the complainant has not submitted  the requisite  papers/ documents, vide letter dated 18.3.2013 Ex.OP6/ Ex.C1. The complainant  submitted that all this amounts to deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party.
7. Whereas the case of the Opposite Party is that the Opposite Party wrote so many letters dated 26.8.2011 (Ex.OP2), 4.11.2011 (Ex.OP3), 23.3.2012 (Ex.OP4) and 17.12.2012 (Ex.OP5) asking the complainant to submit untraced report duly accepted by the court and other documents, but the complainant did not furnish the documents. So, the claim of the complainant was treated as ‘No Claim’, by the Opposite Party vide letter dated 18.3.2013 (Ex.OP6). Ld.counsel for the opposite party submitted that there is no deficiency of service on the part of the Opposite Party.
8. From the entire above discussion, we have come to the conclusion that  the complainant got his motor cycle bearing registration No.PB-02-BJ-8266 covering risk w.e.f. 21.7.2010 to 20.7.2011,  insured with Opposite Party for a Insured Declared Value of Rs.38,375/- vide insurance cover Ex.C3. Said vehicle has been stolen by some unknown person on 3.5.2011. The complainant lodged complaint with police authorities of P.S.A Division, Amritsar vide letter dated 3.5.2011 Ex.C4, on which the police recorded their pleadings and tagged the same with similar FIR No. 65 dated 15.3.2011 under section 379 of IPC, at P.S.A Division, Amritsar. Opposite Party was also duly informed. Police could not  trace out the said motor cycle of the complainant and the concerned SHO, P.S.A Division, Amritsar issued untraced certificate under section 173 Cr.PC dated 8.8.2011 Ex.C5. The claim was lodged by the complainant with Opposite Party. No doubt, the Opposite Party in their earlier letter dated 26.8.2011 Ex.OP2 and letter dated 4.11.2011 Ex.OP3 demanded untraced report under section 173 Cr.PC. duly accepted by Judicial Magistrate, NCRB report, but vide their letter dated 23.3.2012 (Ex.OP4) and letter dated 17.12.2012 (Ex.OP5), Opposite Party demanded only untraced report duly accepted by the court i.e. concerned Ilaqa Magistrate. As the complainant could not furnish the untraced report duly accepted by the court i.e. concerned Ilaqa Magistrate, so the Opposite Party vide letter dated 18.3.2013 Ex.OP6 closed the case of the complainant as ‘no claim’. Opposite Party was not justified in closing the case of the complainant as ‘no claim’ only on the ground that complainant could not furnish untraced report  under section 173 Cr.P.C.duly accepted by Ilaqa Magistrate. It has been held by Hon’ble National Commission, New Delhi in case  M/s.Delkon (India) Pvt.Ltd Vs. The Oriental Insurance Company Limited III(1993) CPJ 313 (NC) that the complainant can not be denied his claim on the ground that final report was not forthcoming. It was further held that when complainant had lodged FIR immediately but has not received the final report from the police, there is no contractual obligation under the policy of insurance for the insured to produce final investigation report from the police. The same view has been taken by Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh State Commission in case New India Assurance Company Limited Vs. Yadvalli Gangadevi I(2004) CPJ 263 as well as by Hon’ble Delhi State Commission in case Ridhi Gupta Vs. National Insurance Company Ltd. III(2008) CPJ 459.  In view of the above discussions, we are of the opinion that Opposite Party was not justified in closing the case of the complainant as ‘no claim’  and the complainant was forced to file the present complaint. All this amounts to deficiency of service on the part of the Opposite Party qua the complainant. 
9. Resultantly, the complaint is allowed with costs and the Opposite Party is directed to pay the insured amount of the vehicle in question, to the complainant i.e. Rs.38,375/- within one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order, subject to furnishing the letter of subrogation, power of attorney for transfer of Registration certificate  of the vehicle in question, NOC from the financiers of the vehicle in question, if any, in favour of the Opposite Party by the complainant, failing which the Opposite Party  shall be liable to pay interest on the insured amount of Rs.38,375/- @ 9% per annum from the date of filing the complaint till the payment is made to the complainant. Opposite Party is also directed to pay the costs of litigation amounting to Rs.1000/-.  Copies of the order be furnished to the parties free of costs. File is ordered to be consigned to the record room. Case could not be disposed of within the stipulated period due to heavy pendency of the cases in this Forum.

Dated: 21.12.2015.                                                       (Bhupinder Singh)                                                                                                  President

hrg                                                (Anoop Sharma)     (Kulwant Kaur Bajwa)   

              Member                         Member