Haryana

Karnal

479/2013

Dharamvir Gaur - Complainant(s)

Versus

National Insurance Company Limited - Opp.Party(s)

S.N. Gaur

04 Nov 2015

ORDER

 

THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM KARNAL.

 

                                                          Complaint No.479 of 2013

                                                               Date of instt. 20.12.2013

                                                               Date of decision: 4.11.2015

 

Dharamvir Gaur r/o House no.1180, Sector 13, Jiwan Jyoti  Ekta Enclave, Urban Estate, Karnal.

                                                                  ……..Complainant.

                                  Vs.

1.The Sr. Divisional Manager, National Insurance Company Limited, Divisional Office: XV, 8, India Exchange Place 1^st Floor, National Insurance Building, Kolkata - 700001.

 

2.The Sr. Divisional Manager, Divisional Office, National Insurance Company Ltd., Karnal 132001.

3.The Branch Manager, National Insurance Company Limited, Karnal..

                                                           ……… Opposite Parties

 

                     Complaint u/s 12 of the Consumer

                     Protection Act.

 

Before          Sh.K.C.Sharma……. President.

                   Sh.Anil Sharma ………Member.

                   Smt.Shashi Sharma…..Member. 

 

 Present:       Sh.S.N.Gaur Advocate for the complainant.

                   Sh.Manjul Mishra Advocate for the OPs.

 

ORDER:

 

 

                   This complaint has been filed by the complainant u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986, on the averments that he got insured his Maruti Car  800 Deluxe bearing registration No. CH01-X-4500 from the Opposite Party ( in  short OP) vide insurance policy No. 150100/31/10/6100037448 valid from 29.9.2010  to 28.9.2011. The said vehicle was stolen on 20.5.2011 at Delhi and First Information Report No.195 dated 21.5.2011 was got registered in Police Station Amar Colony, South East District, Delhi. State Crime  record Bureau  (H) Madhuban  submitted   Enquiry Report that  the car could not be recovered.  Thereafter, police sent untraced report to the concerned Court, which was accepted. It has further been submitted that complainant lodged claim with the Insurance Company. Various papers  as detailed in letters dated 7.3.2012 and 15.9.2012 were sought by the Insurance Company  from him, but he could obtain the copy of police report of the car being untraced,  through court on 1.12.2012. Thereafter, he completed all the requisite formalities and submitted all the documents sought by the Insurance Company alongwith letter dated 17.12.2012. However, vide letter dated 4.2.2013, he was informed that his claim was made “No Claim”  on 18.12.2012 as letters dated 7.3.2012 and 15.9.2012 were not complied with. It has further been submitted that documents were sent by the complainant to the Insurance company on 19.12.2012 alongwith letter dated 17.12.2012 and he also informed that completion of formalities  took  long time and delay was unavoidable as  certified copy of the untraced report could be obtained on 1.12.2012. However, the  Insurance company repudiated his claim  arbitrarily despite completion of all the formalities. Thereafter, he approached the office  of Ops  many times vide letters dated 8.5.2013, 17.12.2012, 1.2.2013, 3.4.2013, 16.4.2013 and 12.1.2013 for settlement of the claim, but to no  response.  As the claim was not settled by the Ops for such a long time there was  deficiency in services and unfair trade practice on the part of the Ops,  which caused him mental harassment  apart from financial loss.

 

3.                Notice of the complaint was given to Ops, who  put into appearance and filed written statement controverting the claim of the complainant. Objections have been raised that complainant has no locus standi and cause of action; that the complainant has concealed the true and material facts from this Forum ; that complaint is not legally maintainable in the present form; that the complaint is false, frivolous and vexacious to the knowledge of the complainant and that there was no deficiency in service on the part of the Ops.

 

                   On merits, it has been admitted that complainant lodged claim with the OP no.1 and thereafter OP  No.1 wrote letter dated 7.3.2012 requesting him to provide original registration book, original insurance policy, original purchase invoice; two keys, certified copy of the police final report through court and termination letter from Financer M/s Kotal Mahindra Finance limited, but the complainant did not comply with the said letter. Reminder dated 15.9.2012 was issued to the complainant  with the same request but the same was also not complied with. OP no.1 issued final reminder dated 22.11.2012 to the complainant giving him fifteen days time to comply with the letter dated 7.3.2012, but the complainant gave deaf ear to the said letter also. Therefore, finding no other alternative, OP no.1 closed the file of the complainant as “No Claim”  on 18.12.2012 and information was duly sent vide letter dated 19.12.2012. Thus, there was no deficiency  in services on the part of Ops. The other allegations made in the complaint have been denied.

 

3.                In evidence of the complainant, his affidavit Ex.C1 and documents Ex.C2 to Ex.C16 have been tendered.

 

4.                In evidence of the OPs, affidavit of Sh.R.K.Goswami, Assistant Manager Ex.O1 and documents Ex.O2 to Ex.O7 have been produced.

 

5.                We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the case file very carefully.

 

6.                There is no dispute between the parties that the complainant lodged claim with the OP no.1 regarding theft of his insured car bearing registration No. HR-01-X/4500.  As per the case of the  Ops, the complainant was asked to submit original registration book, original insurance policy, original FIR, original purchase invoice, keys (two) certified copy of the police final report through court and termination letter from financer M/s Kotak Mahidnra Finance Limited and letters dated 7.3.2012, 15.9.2012 and 22.11.2012 were sent to him in that regard, but he did not comply, therefore, his claim was made as “No claim” on 18.12.2012.  On the other hand complainant has submitted that completion of the formalities took long time, as certified copy of the Police report could be obtained through the court on 1.12.2012 and as  such the  delay was unavoidable. The complainant sent all the requisite documents to the OP no.1 alongwith letter dated 17.12.2012, the copy of which is Ex.C6, but the Ops had made his claim as “No Claim” on 18.12.2012 on the ground of not complying with the letters dated 7.3.2012, 15.9.2012 and 22.11.2012 and informed him about the same vide letter dated 4.2.2013.

7.                   From the pleadings and evidence of the parties, it is emphatically clear that complainant had submitted the requisite documents demanded from him by OP no.1 for settling his claim  alongwith letter dated 17.12.2012, but his claim was made as “No Claim”  by the OPs on 18.12.2012 due to non submission of the documents despite reminders.  However, the Ops did not consider claim of the complainant even after submission of all the required documents by him.    The order accepting the police report “that vehicle could not be traced out” was passed by the Learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Sought East, New Delhi on 1.12.2012, as is  evident  from the copy of the order Ex.C13. Copy of the untraced report submitted by the police is Ex.C12. Therefore,  the complainant could not submit the untraced report of the police through court before 1.12.2012. Some time was also required for obtaining copy of the order. Thus, the delay in submitting documents by the complainant to the OP no.1 was unavoidable  and not intentional. Therefore, it was incumbent upon  the Ops to consider the claim of the complainant after submission of the documents even after making his claim as “No Claim”  on 18.12.2012. However, the Ops did not consider his claim despite sending repeated reminders dated 11.1.2013, 7.2.2012, 3.4.2012, 16.4.2012 and 8.5.2013 sent by the complainant. In this way, there was certainly deficiency in services on the part of Ops.

 

8.                As a sequel to the foregoing  discussion, we accept the present complaint and direct the Ops to make the payment of the sum insured to the complainant as per the terms and conditions of the policy, within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, failing which OP would be liable to pay interest on the sum insured at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of expiry of thirty days of this order till realization.  The complainant shall also be entitled for a sum of Rs.10,000/- for the mental agony and harassment caused to him and for the litigation expenses. The parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

 

Announced
dated:04.11.2015                                                                            

                                                                (K.C.Sharma)

                                                                   President,

                                                         District Consumer Disputes

                                                          Redressal Forum, Karnal.

 (Anil Sharma)       (Smt.Shashi Sharma)    

   Member.                             Member.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Present:        Sh.S.N.Gaur Advocate for the complainant.

                   Sh.Manjul Mishra Advocate for the Ops

 

                   Arguments heard. Vide our separate order of the even date, the present complaint has been accepted. The parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

 

Announced
dated:04.11.2015                                                                             

                                                                    (K.C.Sharma)

                                                                   President,

                                                         District Consumer Disputes

                                                          Redressal Forum, Karnal.

 (Anil Sharma)       (Smt.Shashi Sharma)    

   Member.                             Member.