This appeal is directed against the final order dated 26/07/2019 delivered by Ld. D.C.D.R.F Siliguri in CC No. 25 of 2016.
The fact of the case is brief thar one Deoraj Tamang, the owner of a bolero B.S. 3 vehicle having 1st party insurance coverage lost the vehicle which was theft away on 01.03.2013 at about 03.35 hrs. while it was parked Infront of his house at Teesta Bazar, Kalimpong and the said theft was intimated to Kalimpong PS on 03/02/2013 and a police case was registered. The owner of the vehicle submitted the claim prayer before the national insurance corporation which was repudiated on the ground that the complainant in presence of witness has withdrawn his insurance claim by putting his signature and L.T.I on claim withdrawn document prepared on non-judicial stamp paper.
So the complainant registered the consumer complaint against such unlawful repudiation of claim and contended that the insurance authority came to his house in presence of his relatives and under the influence of alcohol obtained his signature in claim withdraw paper by appling the undue influence and influence of liquor.
The insurance company has contested the case and denied all materials allegations of the complainant and specifically mentioned in their WV that for want of territorial Jurisdiction the case was liable to be dismissed.
Their further case is that the complainant at his own instance has withdrawn the claim declaring his intention of withdrawal in Nepali language in non-judicial stamp paper.
Ld. Forum after hearing the case come to conclusion that the insurance policy was purchased on the day of the alleged theft that is on 31/01/2013 and the alleged theft took place in the same night ie on 01/02/2013 and the insurance surveyor closed the case on the ground of “ close proximate” and withdrawn of claim by the insured and for that reason the consumer complaint was dismissed.
Being aggrieved with the order this appeal follows on the ground that the observation of the Ld. Forum and appreciation of the evidences was full of error and liable to be set aside.
The appeal is contested by the insurance company as respondents. The hearing of the case on behalf of the appellant has conducted through Ld. Legal counsel. Both sides furnished the WNA. The Parties to the appeal has conducted the hearing through Ld. Advocates .
Decision with reasons,
Having heard the Ld. Legal counsels of both sides, it is revealed that at the time of purchase of the bolero vehicle, the insurer was Royal Sundaram Insurance Company till 17/10/2012 the said policy lapsed after the mid night on 17/10/2012. There after, the complainant insured the vehicle on 31/01/2013 with the National Insurance Company by payment annual premium Rs. 14,655 on that very night about 03.35 hrs. it was stolen.
It is also admitted position that the complainant has executed a self declared claim withdrawal, prepared in Nepali language in non-judicial stamp paper by putting his signature and L.T.I on it. The said declaration paper also contained the signature of his close relatives Began Lama and Kiran Chhetri.
The complainant/appellant claims that the insurance Company officials come to his house and could obtained the signature of himself and witness in withdrawn paper under the influence of alcohol and subsequently he revoked the said withdrawal by sending Legal notice to his insurance Company on 02/09/2013.
Now the question is whether the complainant withdrawn his claim at his own will or he was unlawfully influenced to do the same.
The report of surveyor appointed by the Insurance Company shows that the said vehicle was theft away before entering into Insurance agreement and for that reason the complainant in order to save his skin has withdrawn the claim.
Ld. Advocate of the appellant mentioned at the time of argument that even the complainant has withdrawn the claim, then also he cannot loss his legal right in claiming the compensation as an insured.
After going through the documents very carefully furnished in this case by the parties, it is revealed that the complainant Deoraj Tamang by a letter dated 12/02/2013 reported to the Motor vehicle authority that his Bolero vehicle was found missing from his garage at Teesta Bazar since 01/01/2013.
He renewed the insurance policy of the vehicle on 31/01/2013 and reported to Kalimpong PS, out post that it was theft away on 01/02/2013 at about 03.35 hrs. with night.
The fact and circumstances arisen in this case clearly indicates that the complainant has entered into Insurance agreement for the vehicle he was not possessing the same and it was not under his custody.
He obtained the Insurance policy in connivance with election agent Suren Pradhan and for that reason while it was disclosed during investigation about such fraud practice he was compelled to withdraw the claim but subsequently intended to legitimate it under the umbrella of CP Act.
So, the act and conduct of the complainant/ Claimant is very doubtful and mischievous. He had not come to claim his equitable right in clean hand and Ld. Forum has rightly adjudicated the dispute by Appling judicious approach and no error could be defected with observation of Ld. Forum. So the appeal devoids any merit.
Hence, it is ordered,
That the appeal be and the same is dismissed on contest without any cost.
Let the same to be communicated to Ld. D.C.D.R.F, Siliguri.
