THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, AMRITSAR
Consumer Complaint No. 625 of 2014
Date of Institution : 1.12.2014
Date of Decision : 20.05.2015
Nisha Chawla W/o Sh. Rohit Chawla, R/o C-2382, Ranjit Avenue, Amritsar
...Complainant
Vs.
Sr.Divisional Manager, National Insurance Company Limited, SCO 93, Distt.Shopping Centre, Ranjit Avenue, Amritsar
General Manager, National Insurance Co.Ltd., 3 Middle Town Street, P.O. Box No. 9229, Kolkatta-700071
....Opp.party
Complaint under section 12/13 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986
Present : For the complainant : In person
For the opposite parties : Sh.P.N.Khanna,Adv.
Quorum : Sh. Bhupinder Singh, President ,Ms. Kulwant Bajwa,Member &
Sh.Anoop Sharma,Member
Order dictated by :-
Bhupinder Singh, President
1 Present complaint has been filed by Nisha Chawla under the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act alleging therein that she being owner of Activa Honda Scooter bearing registration No. PB-02-BP-1734 got the same insured with the oppsotie party vide policy No. 401200/31/12/6200000335 for the period from 10.5.2012 to 9.5.2013. According to the complainant the said scooter was stolen from outside Divine Beauty Saloon, Katra Moti Ram, Amritsar and the matter was reported to P.S. Kotwali in this regard and FIR No. 65 u/s 379 IPC was registered at P.S. Kotwali. The matter was also reported to the opposite party on 13.10.2012 after submitting all the requisite documents i.e. duplicate RC two original keys, leaf of cancelled cheque, attested copy of FIR, NCRB report,untraced report etc. But the opposite party did not settle the claim of the complainant and finally closed the claim as No Claim vide letter dated 25.7.2014. Alleging the same to be deficiency in service complaint was filed seeking directions to the oppsoite party to pay the insured amount i.e. Rs. 36000/- alongwith interest. Compensation of Rs. 50000/- alongwith litigation expenses were also demanded.
2. On notice, opposite party appeared and filed written version in which it was submitted that complainant has failed to submit the requisite documents as demanded by the opposite party, as such the claim of the complainant was filed as No Claim vide letter datd 25.7.2014. While denying and controverting other allegations, dismissal of complaint was prayed.
3. Complainant tendered into evidence her affidavit Ex.C-1 alongwith documents Ex.C-2 to Ex.C-24.
4. Opposite parties No.1 & 2 tendered affidavit of Sh.H.S.Chawla, Sr.Divisional Manager Ex.OP1,2/1, letter dated 19.10.2012 Ex.OP1,2/2, copy of lettr dated 21.11.2012 Ex.OP1,2/3, copy of letter dated 25.3.2013 Ex.OP1,2/4, copy of repudiation letter dated 25.7.2014 Ex.OP1,2/5, copy of policy alongwith terms and conditions Ex.OP1,2/6.
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 the parties.
6. From the record i.e.pleadings of the parties and the evidence produced on record by both the parties, it is clear that complainant got her scooter Honda Activa bearing registration No. PB-02-BP-1734 insured with the opposite party vide policyNo. 401200/31/12/6200000335 for the period from 10.5.2012 to 9.5.2013. The said vehicle was stolen from outside Divine Beauty Saloon, Katra Moti Ram on 11.10.2012 by some unknown persons. Matter was immediately reported to P.S. Kotwali, Amritsar vide letter dated 11.10.2012 Ex.C-3 and the said matter was tagged by the police with FIR No. 65 dated 2.4.2012 P.S. “E” Division, Amritsar, copy of which is Ex.C-4. The opposite party has also admitted that they had received intimation regarding the theft of the vehicle of the complainant on 13.10.2012 vide letter dated 19.10.2012 Ex.C-6. The police could not trace out the vehicle and they issued untraced certificate Ex.C-22. The matter was also reported to the NCRB by the Commissioner of Police vide letter dated 1.7.2013 Ex.C-12 alongwith list of vehicles stolen but not recovered Ex.C-10. Report of CRO branch Amritsar in this regard is Ex.C-12 . With the report of NCRB claim was lodged with the opposite party, but the opposite party did not settle the claim of the complainant on the ground that individual/separate FIR should be provided for the theft of the vehicle of the complainant. 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 opposite party has filed the case of the complainant as “No claim” vide letter dated 25.7.2014 Ex.OP1,2/5 as the complainant did not provide requisite documents /papers i.e. independent and separate FIR of theft of the scooter of the complainant, to the opposite party. Ld.counsel for the opposite party submitted that there is no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party qua the complainant.
8. From the entire above discussion, we have come to the conclusion that Honda Activa Scooter bearing registration No. PB-02-BP-1734 of the complainant was duly insured with the opposite party vide policy No. 401200/31/12/6200000335 Ex.C-2 for the period from 10.5.2012 to 9.5.2013. The said vehicle was stolen by some unknown persons on 11.10.2012 when it was parked outside Divine Beauty Saloon, Katra Moti Ram,Amritsar. Matter was immediately reported by the complainant to the police vide letter dated 11.10.2012 Ex.C-3. After process the police attached this case with FIR 65 dated 2.4.2012 P.S. “E” Division, Amritsar, copy of which is Ex.C-4. Opposite party was also immediately informed by the complainant as admitted by the opposite party itself vide their letter dated 19.10.2012 Ex.C-6. The police could not trace out the vehicle and issued untraced certificate Ex.C-22 . NCRB report in this regard is Ex.C-12 alongwith list of vehicles stolen but could not be recovered Ex.C-10. Claim was lodged with the opposite party but the opposite party treated the case of the complainant as “No Claim” on the ground that the complainant could not supply independent and separate FIR regarding theft of the vehicle of the complainant. It has been held by the Hon'ble National Commission in case M/s . Delkon (India) Pvt.Ltd Vs. The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. III(1993) CPJ 313 (NC) that the complainant cannot be denied his claim on the ground that final police 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 the Hon'ble Andhra Pradesh State Commission in case New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Yadvalli Gangadevi 1 (2004) CPJ 263 as well as by the Hon'ble Delhi State Commission in case Ridhi Gupta Vs. National Insurance Co.Ltd III (2008) CPJ 459. The complainant is only bound to inform the police regarding the theft of his vehicle.
9. In view of the above discussion, we hold that opposite party has wrongly repudiated the claim of the complainant. Consequently we allow the complaint with costs and the opposite party is directed to pay the insured amount i.e. Rs. 36000/- as per insurance policy Ex.C-2 alongwith interest @ 9% p.a from the date of filing of the complaint till payment is made to the complainant subject to execution of power of attorney, letter of subrogation and transfer of RC in favour of the opposite party. Opposite party is also directed to pay costs of litigation to the. tune of Rs. 1000/- 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.
10. Case could not be disposed of within the stipulated period due to heavy pendency of the cases in this Forum.
20.05.2015 ( Bhupinder Singh )
President
( Kulwant Kaur Bajwa) (Anoop Sharma)
/R/ Member Member
