BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

CACHAR :: SILCHAR

Con. Case No. 3 of 2012

            Sri Partha Bhattacharjee,

            S/O Lt. Benoy Kumar Bhattacharjee

            C/O Anita Das, Sarala Bhawan, Sunil Sarkar Lane, Silchar ……………        Complainant.           

                                                            -V/S-

            1.         The National Insurance Co. Ltd,

                        (Represented by the Divisional Manager), 

                        Carrying on its insurance business at

                        Clud Road, Capital Travels Building,

                        P.O- Silchar-1, Dist. Cachar, Assam.                                                     O.P. No.1

            2.         HDFC Bank Ltd.,

                        Carrying on its banking business at Police Bazzar

                        Shillong, Maghalaya, (Represented by its

                        Local Branch Manager, Clud Road, Silchar-1                                   O.P No.2

Present: -                                Sri Bishnu Debnath,                                        President,

District Consumer Forum,

                                                Cachar, Silchar.

                                                            Sri Kamal Kumar Sarda,                                     Member,

                                                            District Consumer Forum,

                                                            Cachar, Silchar.

            Appeared: -                Sri Ajoy Kumar Choudhury, Advocate for the complainant.

Sri Debasish Som, Advocate for the O.Ps.

                            Date of Evidence……………………   10-07-2012, 19-09-2012

                         Date of written argument………      30-07-2015,

                         Date of oral argument …………...      16-05-2018 

                         Date of judgment…………………...      15-06-2018

JUDGMENT AND ORDER

                  (Sri Bishnu Debnath) President,

1. The complainant Partha Bhattacharjee purchased a Car WagonR (VXI) on financial aid of HDFC Bank Ltd. Club Road, Silchar vide vehicle Regd. No. ML-05-G-3165. The said vehicle has been insured with National Insurance Co. Ltd. (O.P No.1). The period of insurance was from 07-10-2010 to 06/10/2011, vide insurance policy No. 200500/31/10/6100000527. But on 09-10-2010 at night about 2-30 A.M the said vehicle has been taken away forcefully by unknown miscreant while the vehicle was proceeding toward Aizawl on deceptive request of those miscreants for asking lift. Anyhow, the driver of that vehicle informed the matter to the complainant and accordingly the complainant lodged FIR to the O/C Vairengte P/S. The complainant also informed the incidence to the O.P No.1 on 11-10-2010 and lodged claim. The O.P No.1 after asking the complainant to submit relevant papers on various dates did not settle the claim. Hence, brought the complaint under the provision of Consumer Protection Act 1986 with prayer for claiming ₹ 3,70,260/- as sum insured and compensation of ₹ 10,000/- and cost of the proceeding.
2. The O.P No.1 submitted W/S. In the W/S stated inter-alia that the alleged theft of the vehicle was took place while use the same on hire in violation of policy condition.
3. During hearing the complainant submitted deposition supporting affidavit and exhibited as many as 8 (eight) number of documents including copy of FIR, copy of police report etc. Thus, O.P No.1 also submitted deposition of DW-1 supporting affidavit and exhibited insurance policy and demand letter of submission of documents.
4. The O.P No.2 did not submit W/S. None has appeared on behalf of the O.P No.2 to contest the case.
5. In this case after closing evidence, the O.P No.1 submitted written argument but the complainant did not submit written argument. I have heard both sides’ counsels and seen the verification report of FIR and police report.​
6. In this case as per verification report, no formal police case has been registered in view of GDE No. 147 dated 09-10-2010. However, copy of CD submitted by Superintendent of Police, Kolasib vide reference No. SP (k)/CRM-6/2014/1581 and vide No. VRTE PS/8/2018/221 dated 05-02-2018. As per that report and in view of Ext-5 police report there is no hope to recover the vehicle bearing Regd. No. ML-05G-3165 E/No. F10DN4652080 and C/No. MA3EED 81S00827231.
7. The main plea of the O.P No.1 is that the vehicle has been used on hire violating the policy condition. But the said fact of hiring the vehicle is not established beyond all reasonable doubt. Nevertheless, it is a terms and conditions that the insurer will not bear liability for any contingence for meeting accident during plying the vehicle on hire, which means the insurance company will be absolved from liability on that situation for 3^rd party liability. But instant case is for own damages. The complainant purchased the insurance policy to protect his property i.e. vehicle. The said property has been stolen, so, as per terms and conditions of the policy he is entitled sum insured subject to depreciation if any from the insurance company.
8. As such the O.P-Insurance Company is asked to pay the sum insured subject to depreciation to the complainant after satisfying the outstanding due of the O.P No.2 in respect of repayment of car loan. The O.P No.1 is also asked to pay compensation of ₹ 5,000/- and cost of the proceeding of ₹ 3,000/- to the complainant. The O.P No.1 is asked to satisfy the award within 45 days from today. In default, interest @ 10% P.A. to be added with the awarded amount till realization. Of course, the complainant must put signature on subrogation letter. Acknowledgement etc. if placed by the O.P.No.1 at the time of payment of awarded amount, so that in future if the stolen vehicle is recovered the complainant cannot claim the vehicle and at the same time it will be treated as property of the insurance company.
9. Supply free certified copy of judgment to the parties of the litigation. Given under my hand and seal of this District Forum on this the 15^th day of June, 2018.