BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, AMRITSAR.

Consumer Complaint No.624 of 2014

Date of Institution: 28-11-2014

Date of Decision: 09-06-2015

Mrs.Harmander Kaur wife of Mr.Jasjit Singh Sethi, proprietor  of M/s.U.S.Computer Products, 1, The Mall, Lawrence Road Chowk, Amritsar-143001.

Complainant

Versus

1. National Insurance Company Limited, Branch Office-20, Batala Road, Amritsar-143001 through its Branch Manager.
2. The Divisional Manager, National Insurance Company Limited, Divisional Office III, Queens Road, Amritsar-143001 through its Divisional Manager.

Opposite Parties

Complaint under section 12 and 13 of the Consumer Protection Act.

Present: For the Complainant: Sh. Vipin Bhasin, Advocate.

              For the Opposite Parties: Sh.S.S.Randhawa, 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 Smt.Harmander Kaur  under the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act alleging therein that she  carries on the business of computer and its peripherals at M/s.U.S.Computer Products, 1, The Mall, Lawrence Road Chowk, Amritsar under the name of M/s.U.S.Computer Products. Complainant alleges that entire stock of the complainant office was insured with the Opposite Parties  vide policy No. 75000049/11 for the period from 4.5.2011 to 3.5.2012 with all due premium paid on it. On the intervening night of 2-3/3/2012, a theft took place at the office of M/s.U.S.Computer Products, 1, The Mall, Lawrence Road Chowk, Amritsar. On the next morning i.e. on 3.3.2012 the complainant reached her office and noticed that there had been a break-in. Apart from the front door locks and ‘earl’ were broken, the glass of the next door was also broken. Inside, the show room was completely ransacked and almost all items on display and some packed cases were found removed and missing. An FIR No. 89 dated 3.3.2012 under section 457/ 380 IPC was lodged with Police Station, Civil Lines, Amritsar. At the time of lodging the FIR,  it was reported that as an initial estimate of computer products valued at Rs.1,45,000/- were stolen. But later on, after scrutinizing the record, it was found that the value of stolen stock was more and it was  revised to Rs.1,63,048/-. The claim was duly lodged with the Opposite Parties under the aforesaid policy. There was no clue of the thieves till 17.12.2012 to the police after filing of the FIR and so police issued an untraced certificate under section 173 Cr.P.C. dated 17.12.2012 which was submitted to the Opposite Parties. The surveyor of the Opposite Parties  demanded certain documents from the complainant. The complainant filed those documents within the prescribed period. Thereafter, the complainant personally met the Opposite Parties  and was assureds that the claim was under process.  The complainant then received letter dated 3.12.2012 from the Opposite Parties  who demanded from the complainant non traceable report issued by the police authorities.  The complainant applied for the Non traceable report with the Police Commissionerate, Amritsar and they issued  untraced certificate under section 173 Cr.P.C. dated 17.12.2012 which was submitted to the Opposite Parties. But despite extending all co-operation to the Opposite Parties  and despite having complied with all their requirements, the Opposite Parties  took no action against the legitimate claim of the complainant, rather the Opposite Party No.2 vide its letter dated 18.3.2013 informed the complainant that their file is being close as ‘no claim’ because the complainant has not complied and submitted the required documents. The reason given for repudiating the claim of complainant by closing the file of the complainant was false and baseless.   Alleging the same to be deficiency in service, complaint was filed seeking directions to the opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs.1,63,048/- on account of loss caused by theft in the office of complainant. Compensation and litigation expenses were also demanded.
2. On notice, Opposite Parties   appeared and filed written version in which it was submitted that the complainant herself is negligent for not providing the ‘Non Traceable Certificate’ which was  demanded by the Opposite Parties vide letter dated 3.12.2012, 26.12.2012, 21.1.2013 and finally on 18.3.2013 the file was closed as ‘No Claim’ for non submitting non traceable certificate. Moreover, the complainant is making excess claim whereas as per the report of surveyor, loss has been assessed to the tune of Rs.1,30,080/- and the said report has been prepared as per the terms and conditions of the policy and excess clause is also applicable as per the terms and conditions of the policy.  While denying and controverting other allegations, dismissal of complaint was prayed.
3. Complainant tendered into evidence his affidavit Ex.C1 alongwith documents Ex.C2 to Ex.C9 and closed the evidence on behalf of the complainant.
4. Opposite Parties tendered into evidence affidavit of Sh.Parveen Mehra, Deputy Manager Ex.OP1 alongwith documents Ex.OP2 to Ex.OP6 and closed the evidence on behalf of the Opposite Parties.
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 that the complainant/ proprietor of the firm M/s.U.S.Computer Products, 1, The Mall, Lawrence Road Chowk, Amritsar got insured the entire   stock which is lying in the  complainant office, with the Opposite Parties  vide policy No. 75000049/11 for the period from 4.5.2011 to 3.5.2012 (Ex.OP6). During the insurance period, i.e. on the intervening night of 2-3/3/2012, a theft took place at the office of M/s.U.S.Computer Products, 1, The Mall, Lawrence Road Chowk, Amritsar and it was noticed by the complainant around 9 A.M. on 3.3.2012. The complainant’ office  front door, locks and earl  were found broken. The  glass of the next door was also broken. Show Room from inside  was completely ransacked and almost all items on display and some packed cases were found removed and missing. The matter was reported to the police. Resultantly, the  police of Police Station, Civil Lines, Amritsar registered FIR No. 89 dated 3.3.2012 under section 457/ 380 IPC, copy of which is Ex.C2. At the time of report to the police,  an initial estimate of loss was assessed  at Rs.1,45,000/-.  But later on, after scrutinizing the record, it was found that the value of stolen stock was of the value of Rs.1,63,048/- as per the details attached with the FIR Ex.C2. The matter was reported to the Opposite Parties  immediately. The police could not  trace out the stolen articles and they issued untraced certificate under section 173 Cr.P.C. on 17.12.2012 Ex.C7. The claim was lodged with the Opposite Parties.  Opposite Party No.1 appointed Surveyor and Loss Assessor Dass Rana & Associates, Chartered Accountant, Amritsar who demanded certain documents from the complainant which were provided to the surveyor. The surveyor submitted their report Ex.OP2 and assessed the loss to the tune of Rs.1,30,080/-. Thereafter, the Opposite Parties  demanded untraced certificate  from the police. The complainant supplied untraced certificate issued by the police under section 173 Cr.P.C. to the Opposite Parties, but the Opposite Parties treated the claim case of the complainant as ‘no claim’ vide letter dated 18.3.2013 on the ground that the complainant had not submitted the required documents i.e. untraced report.  Ld.counsel for the   complainant  submitted that all this amounts to deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties.
7. Whereas the case of the opposite parties is that the Opposite Parties  vide letter dated   26.12.2012 (Ex.OP5) and letter dated  21.1.2013 asked the complainant to submit   non traceable certificate to Opposite Party No.1, but the complainant could not submit the non traceable certificate. As such, her claim was closed as ‘no claim’ and the complainant was informed vide letter dated 18.3.2013 Ex.OP3. Ld.counsel for the opposite parties  submitted that there is no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties.
8. From the entire above discussion, we have come to the conclusion that the complainant got entire stock lying in the premises of their firm M/s.U.S.Computer Products, 1, The Mall, Lawrence Road Chowk, Amritsar insured with the Opposite Parties  vide policy Ex.OP6 for the period  from 4.5.2011 to 3.5.2012 (Ex.OP6). On the intervening night of 2-3/3/2012, a theft took place at the office of M/s.U.S.Computer Products, 1, The Mall, Lawrence Road Chowk, Amritsar. Thieves broke the office door, lock and even earl of the lock. The  glass of the next door was also broken. Show Room from inside  was completely ransacked and almost all items on display and some packed cases were found missing. The matter was reported to the police. Resultantly, FIR No. 89 dated 3.3.2012 under section 457/ 380 IPC was registered by Police Station, Civil Lines, Amritsar Ex.C2 and as per the complainant version, the thieves have  stolen the stock to the tune of Rs.1,63,048/-. However, in the FIR, the complainant  alleged that the loss was to the tune of Rs.1,45,000/- (estimated). The matter was also reported to the Opposite Parties  immediately. Resultantly, the Opposite Parties  appointed Surveyor and Loss Assessor M/s.Dass Rana & Associates, Chartered Accountant, Amritsar who called certain documents from the complainant vide letter dated 4.10.2012 Ex.C4 which were supplied by the complainant to the Opposite Parties  vide letter dated 26.12.2012 Ex.C5. The police could not trace out the thieves and the stolen articles and they issued non traceable certificate under section 173 Cr.P.C Ex.C7. The surveyor submitted his report dated 8.11.2012  Ex.OP2 holding the theft genuine and assessed the loss to the tune of Rs.1,53,032/- less deduction for variances for reasons discussed in the surveyor report Ex.OP2 to the tune of Rs.22,952/-. In all the total loss assessed to the tune of Rs.1,30,080/-. Thereafter, the Opposite Parties  asked the complainant vide letter dated 26.12.2012 Ex.OP5 and letter dated 21.1.2013 Ex.OP4 to provide the non traceable certificate  from the police. The complainant supplied the non traceable certificate   to the Opposite Parties,  issued by the police Ex.C7, but even then, the Opposite Parties  treated the claim of the complainant as ‘no claim’ vide letter dated 18.3.2013 Ex.OP3 on the ground that the complainant could not submit the requisite documents. The only document required by the Opposite Parties  from the complainant was non traceable certificate  which the complainant supplied to the Opposite Parties  and also produced on record of this file Ex.C7 i.e. non traceable certificate under section 173 Cr.P.C. issued by the police. Opposite Parties were therefore, not justified in treating the claim of the complainant as ‘no claim’ and all this certainly amounts to deficiency of service on the part of the Opposite Parties.
9. The Opposite Parties  appointed Surveyor and Loss Assessor M/s.Dass Rana & Associates, Chartered Accountant, Amritsar and he assessed the loss to the tune of Rs.1,30,080/- vide their report Ex.OP2. The complainant did not challenge this surveyor report nor pointed out any deficiency or defect in the surveyor report. Therefore, we hold that the Opposite Parties  were bound to compensate this amount of Rs.1,30,080/-,  as assessed by the surveyor vide report Ex.OP2, to the complainant.
10. Resultantly, the complaint is allowed with costs and the Opposite Parties  are directed to pay this amount of Rs.1,30,080/- alongwith interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the complaint till the payment is made to the complainant. The Opposite Parties  are also directed to pay the costs of litigation to the tune of Rs.2,000/- to the complainant.   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: 09-06-2015.                                          (Bhupinder Singh)                                                                                                President

hrg                                                (Anoop Sharma)     (Kulwant Kaur Bajwa)   

              Member                         Member