This is a case U/S 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 with the prayer for an award directing the opposite party to pay Rs.3,00,000/- for loss of vehicle by theft, Rs.50,000/- as compensation for harassment, mental pain and agony, Rs.10,000/- as litigation cost and other reiefs.

The complainant’s case in brief is that the complainant was the registered owner of the vehicle No.WB-73A/3395 (Mahindra Pick Up Van) and the said vehicle was duly insured with the O.P., National Insurance Company Limited vide Insurance Policy No.510701/31/08/6300003766 valid from 24.02.2009 to 23.02.2010. On 18.05.2009 at about 08-00 pm the driver of the said vehicle kept the vehicle in front of the godown of Yadav Aich situated at N. S. Road under Islampur P.S. and on 19.05.2009 morning at about 07-00 am when the

said driver went to bring the vehicle from that place the driver did not find the vehicle anywhere, he informed the matter to the complainant. The complainant lodged a written complaint at the Islampur P.S. over such theft of vehicle. The concerned P.S. started a case being No.242/2009 dated 19.05.2009 U/S 379 IPC and after the completion of investigation the Police submitted charge sheet  but the vehicle was not traced out. The complainant also intimated the matter to the O.P. on 25.05.2009 but he failed to submit original documents connected with the vehicle as those were also with the vehicle in question.

The O.P. contested this case by filing written version stating inter alia that the case is not maintainable, the complainant did not supply required original vehicular documents along with the information of theft, the O.P. is liable to pay maximum sum of Rs.1,58,616/- only on the proof of alleged theft. The O.P. has claimed that this case is liable to be dismissed with cost.  

DECISIONS WITH REASONS

We carefully considered the contents of the petition of compliant, written version, documentary evidence adduced, written argument filed by the O.P. and argument advanced by the Ld. Lawyers for the parties.

It reveals from the complaint, photocopies of registration certificate, insurance policy and other evidence on record that the complainant was the registered owner of vehicle No.WB-73A/3395 at the time of theft of the vehicle-in-question, he being the policy holder was/is the consumer and the O.P. being the insurer was/ is the service provider as per Act.

In support of his case the complainant submitted the photocopies of FIR, Charge Sheet, Registration Certificate and Insurance Policy Certificate which reveals that on receiving the complain from the complainant regarding theft of vehicle the Police Authority started a case U/S 379 IPC, investigated the matter and submitted Charge Sheet and the said vehicle was covering risk by 1st Party Insurance Policy including theft coverage etc. The complainant also informed the matter at an early date of the occurrence supplying copies of FIR and Charge Sheet to the O.P. So, it appears that the complainant completed  his part of contract as a consumer. On the other hand the O.P., National Insurance Company Limited being informed about the theft of vehicle, engaged one investigator to investigate the actual happenings and also collected documents for their satisfaction. The O.P.’s investigator got enough opportunity to verify the documents in consultation with the concerned R.T.A. and concerned P.S. rather the investigator and the O.P. by sending letters asked the complainant to supply the original vehicular documents which was not at all possible for the complainant to submit the same as those were stolen  with the

                                                      vehicle theft which was informed earlier. The O.P. to avoid their contractual liability took attempt to shift their burden upon the complainant and with ill intention intimated the complainant that his claim file had been closed. From this conduct of the O.P. it is clear  that there were negligent and deficiency in service on the part of the O.P.  For such illegal acts of the O.P. the complainant has suffered harassment, mental pain and agony and he has been forced to come before this Forum. Considering the materials on record, the Forum finds that the complainant is entitled to get Rs. 1,59,616/- only for loss of vehicle in place  of his claim of Rs, 3,00,000/-, reasonable compensation and litigation cost.

In view of the above discussions this Forum is of the opinion that the complainant his been able to prove his case in part and as such he  is entitled to get Rs.1,59,616/- for loss of vehicle, Rs.10,000/- as compensation for mental harassment and Rs.1,000/- as litigation cost.

Fees paid is correct. 

Hence, it is

ORDERED,

that the complaint case No. CC-52/2013 is allowed on contest in part without cost. Accordingly the complainant do get an award directing the O.P. National Insurance Company Limited to pay a sum of Rs.1,59,616/- for loss of vehicle, Rs.10,000/- as compensation and Rs.1,000/- as litigation cost, totaling to Rs.1,70,616/- (Rupees One Lakh Seventy Thousand Six Hundred and Sixteen) only to the complainant within one month from this day failing which awarded amount of total  Rs.1,70,616/- will carry 6% interest p.a. from the date of filing of this complaint petition till the date of realization and the complainant will be at liberty to place this award in execution against the O.P. as per law.

Let true copies of this Final order be delivered to the parties free of cost.