BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,   REWARI.

                                                Consumer Complaint No: 292 of  2013.

Date of Institution:    06.8.2013.

Date of Decision:     12.3.2015.

Pankaj son of Shri Pardeep resident of house no. 1610, Mohalla Tejpura, Rewari, Tehsil and Distt. Rewari.

                                                                                …….Complainant.

                                      Versus

1. National Insurance Company Ltd. Herohonda Vertical 101, 106 BMC House N-1 Cannaught Palace New Delhi -110001 through Manager,

2. M/s Virendra Automobiles, Circular Road Dharuhera Chu8ngi, Rewari, Tehsil and Distt. Rewari.

                                                                        …...Opposite  Parties.

Complaint Under Section 12  of Consumer Protection Act

        Before: Shri  Raj  Kumar ………. …..………..PRESIDENT

                      Shri Kapil Dev Sharma…………………MEMBER

Present :          Shri Sanjay Aggarwal, Advocate for the complainant.

                         Shri S.K.Gautam, Advocate for  opposite party no.1.

                         Shri Rajeev Gupta, Advocate for opposite party no.2.

                                                ORDER

 Per  Raj Kumar President

                             Factual matrix comprising the case of the complainant, shorn of details, is that the motorcycle bearing registration no. HR-36Q-8322  of the complainant duly insured with

the opposite parties  was stolen on 28.5.2012  and to this effect FIR no. 168 dated 30.5.2012 was registered with Police Station, City Rewari and accordingly he took steps for getting the insured amount but the same has not been given to him in spite of repeated requests; hence this complaint.

2)                         Opposite parties contested the claim on the ground 

that the complainant has no cause of action to file the present complaint as he has not at all lodged the claim nor intimated the occurrence.   Thus, the dismissal of the complaint has been prayed for.

3)                         We have heard both the counsel for the parties and gone through the record of the case available on the file thoroughly.

4)                         During the course of arguments as well as from the pleadings, it clearly emerges out that the insurance company has not yet decided the claim.    As per the opposite parties, the complainant has not lodged the claim nor intimated the same to the insurance company. This plea is, however, contradicted by counsel for the complainant and has requested the court to decide the matter in controversy.  The Consumer Forum cannot perform the job of insurance company and decide the matter. It can only see into the validity of the order passed by the opposite parties regarding the claim.  Since no order has yet been passed by the opposite parties regarding the claim, i.e. neither it has been allowed nor repudiated, so no cause of action has yet arisen for the court to interfere into the matter.  The complaint is, therefore, pre mature. Under the circumstances, we deem it proper to direct the complainant to supply

and lodge the claim with the opposite parties within 15 days to the insurance company   and then the later will decide the same within 45 days.  Needless to say that the complainant can agitate the matter again by filing a fresh complaint if he  is not satisfied with the decision of the opposite parties.   With these observations, the complaint is disposed of  accordingly. 

Announced

12.3.2015.                          

                                                                    President,

                                                          Distt. Consumer Disputes

                                                          Redressal Forum, Rewari.

                    Member, 

             DCDRF,Rewari.