Haryana

Sonipat

CC/184/2015

Ravinder Sangwan S/o Satbir Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

national Insurance Co. Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Sunder Sham Chahal

25 Feb 2016

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,

SONEPAT.

               

 

                                Complaint No.184 of 2015

                                Instituted on:04.06.2015

                                Date of order:25.02.2016

 

Ravinder Sangwan son of Satbir Singh, r/o village Nuran Khera, tehsil Gohana, distt. Sonepat.

 

…Complainant.  

Versus

 

National Insurance Co. Ltd., Branch Gohana, through its Branch Manager.

 

                                                      …Respondent.

 

 

COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 12 OF       

THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986

 

Argued by: Sh. Sudershan Chahal Adv. for complainant.

           Sh. HC Jain Adv. for respondent.

 

BEFORE     NAGENDER SINGH, PRESIDENT.

          PRABHA WATI, MEMBER.

          D.V. RATHI, MEMBER.

 

O R D E R

 

          Complainant has filed the present complaint against the respondents alleging himself to be the registered owner of motor cycle no.HR11C/5948 and the same was insured with the respondent for the period w.e.f. 15.7.2013 to 14.7.2014 with IDV of Rs.21000/-.  Unfortunately, the said motor cycle was stolen on 16.6.2014 by some unknown person.  Fir was lodged with the concerned police station on 26.6.2014.  The complainant has completed all the formalities and has submitted all the required documents to the respondent, but of no use.  Even the legal notice sent to the respondent on 24.11.2014 by the complainant has not brought any fruitful result and that amounts to a grave deficiency in service on the part of the respondent. So, he has come to this Forum and has filed the present complaint.

2.        In reply, the respondent has submitted that  there is no deficiency in service on the part of the respondent.  The claim of the complainant was rightly closed as no claim because of non-co operation on the part of the complainant himself as he did not provide the required documents to the respondent.  The alleged theft of the vehicle has been stated to have taken place on 16.6.2014 whereas FIR was lodged on 26.6.2014 and intimation to the respondent was given on 3.7.2014 i.e. after 17 days of the alleged occurrence.  The complainant is not entitled of any relief since there is no deficiency in service on the part of the respondent and thus, prayed for the dismissal of the present complaint.

3.        We have heard the arguments advanced by the ld. Counsel for both the parties at length and we have also gone through the entire relevant material available on the case file carefully & minutely.

          Ld. Counsel for the respondent has submitted that there is no deficiency in service on the part of the respondent.  The claim of the complainant was rightly closed as no claim because of non-co operation on the part of the complainant himself as he did not provide the required documents to the respondent inspite of letters dated 27.8.2014, 22.9.2014 and 20.10.2014.

          In our view, the complainant himself is at fault as he has failed to provide the required documents to the respondent insurance company.  However, in our view, the ends of justice would be fully met if some directions are given to both the parties.  Accordingly, we hereby direct the complainant to complete the formalities and to submit all the required documents with  the respondents within a period of 45 days from the date of passing of this order. Similarly, the respondent is also directed to decide the claim case of the complainant within a period of 30 days which shall be started from the date when the complainant complete the formalities and deposits the required documents with the respondents.  However, it is made clear here that if the complainant remain dissatisfied with the decision of the insurance company, then he can approach the Forum by filing the fresh complaint for redressal of his grievances.

           With these observations, findings and directions, the present complaint stands disposed off.

Certified copy of this order be provided to both the

parties free of cost.
          File be consigned to the record-room.

 

 

(Prabha Wati)        (DV Rathi)                 (Nagender Singh-President)

Member DCDRF        Member DCDRF                   DCDRF, Sonepat.

 

Announced:25.02.2016