Haryana

Karnal

686/2009

Deepak Sachdeva S/o Mohan Lal - Complainant(s)

Versus

National Insurance Company Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

Sh. Rahul Bali

14 Jan 2016

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL  FORUM KARNAL.

 

                                                          Complaint No.686 of 2009

                                                          Date of instt.8.10.2009

                                                          Date of decision:14.01.2016

 

Deepak Sachdeva son of Sh.Mohan Lal resident of house no.1698 , Sector 7, Karnal.

                                                                  ……..Complainant.

                   Vs.

 

National Insurance Company, Opposite Bus stand, Karnal through its Regional Manager.

                                                                  …..Opposite Party.

                   Complaint u/s 12 of the Consumer

                   Protection Act.

 

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

                   Sh.Anil Sharma……………Member.

 

Present:-       Sh.Rahul Bali Advocate for the complainant.

                   Sh.Sanjeev Vohra Advocate for the Opposite Party.

ORDER

                   This  complainant has been  filed by the complainant u/s  12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 , on the averments  that the Hero Honda  Motor Cycle bearing registration No.HR-05-K-5245 owned by the complainant was insured with the Opposite Party  for the period of 12.3.2006 to 11.3.2007, vide insurance policy No. 420501/31/05/6200006289.   The said Motor cycle was stolen on 25.6.2006 by some unknown person and First Information Report No.316 dated 16.7. 2006 was lodged with the Police. The complainant also gave intimation of the theft to the Registration Authority and submitted claim form duly filled in alongwith all the necessary documents to the Manager of the Opposite Party, but the claim of the complainant was not paid despite repeated written requests which amounted to deficiency in services on the part of the Opposite Party. He suffered mental agony and harassment apart from financial loss, due to act and conduct of the Opposite Party.

 

2.                 On notice the Opposite Party appeared and filed  written statement controverting the claim of the complainant. Objections have been raised that the complaint is not maintainable and that the complainant has not come to this Forum with clean hands.

                   On merits, issuance of the insurance policy in respect of the vehicle of the complainant and theft of the said vehicle has not been denied. It has been pleaded that the complainant submitted the unsigned claim form and did not submit the required documents  such as untraceable report from the court,  report of NCRB and key. Therefore, there was no deficiency in services on the part of the Opposite Party.

3.                 In evidence of the complainant, he filed  his affidavit Ex.C1 and documents Ex.C2 to Ex.C9.

4.                 On the other hand, in evidence of Opposite Party, affidavit of Sh.B.L.Kain has been filed as Ex.O1.

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

6.                 After going through the evidence on the file and circumstances of the present case, it emerges that the complainant has not produced any evidence on the file to show that the complainant ever submitted duly signed claim form with the Opposite Party   and submitted the documents required by the Opposite Party. The Opposite Party has specifically pleaded that the claim of the complainant has not been repudiated. In such circumstances, in the absence of lodging of complete claim and submitting required documents, no deficiency can be said to have taken place on the part of the Opposite Party  and as such no cause of action accrued  to the complainant.  Thus the present complaint is pre-mature.

 

7.                 Therefore, in view of the above discussion, we direct the complainant to lodge the claim alongwith required documents with the Opposite Party regarding  theft of his vehicle within a period of fifteen days and thereafter the Opposite Party  shall settle the claim of the complainant within a period of thirty days.  The present complaint is disposed off accordingly. The parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the record room after due  compliance.

Announced
dated:14.01.2016

                                                                    (K.C.Sharma)

                                                                   President,

                                                         District Consumer Disputes

                                                          Redressal Forum, Karnal.

            (Anil Sharma ) 

               Member.

 

 

 

                     Deepak Sachdeva Versus NIC Ltd.

 

 

Present:-       Sh.Rahul Bali Advocate for the complainant.

                   Sh.Sanjeev Vohra Advocate for the Opposite Party.

 

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

 

Announced
dated:14.01.2016

                                                                    (K.C.Sharma)

                                                                   President,

                                                         District Consumer Disputes

                                                          Redressal Forum, Karnal.

            (Anil Sharma ) 

               Member.