Haryana

Gurgaon

CC/427/2011

Rambir - Complainant(s)

Versus

National Insurance - Opp.Party(s)

24 Mar 2014

ORDER

 

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  

DISTRICT   CONSUMER   DISPUTES   REDRESAL FORUM GURGAON-122001.

                                                                                                Consumer Complaint No.427 of 2011                                                                                                                                          Date of Institution: 05.08.2011/08.08.2011                                                                                                                         Date of Decision: 13.08.2015

 

Rambir s/o Sh. Sheo Chand, R/o Village & Post Office Kadarpur, Tehsil Sohna, District Gurgaon, Haryana.

 

                                                                                        ……Complainant.

 

                                                Versus

 

The Manager, National Insurance Co. Ltd, Office at SCO No.41, 42, 43 Sector 31, Gurgaon, Haryana.  

  ..Opposite party

                                                                            

                                               

Complaint under Sections 12 & 14 of Consumer Protection Act,1986                                                                 

 

BEFORE:     SH.SUBHASH GOYAL, PRESIDENT.

                     SMT JYOTI SIWACH, MEMBER

 SH.SURENDER SINGH BALYAN, MEMBER.

 

Present:        Sh. Har Sarup Singh, Adv for the complainant.

                    Shri Atul Grover, Adv for the opposite party.

 

ORDER       SUBHASH GOYAL, PRESIDENT.       

 

 

The case of the complainant, in brief, is that he got his motorcycle Hero Honda Splendor bearing Regd. No.HR-26-BB-4163 insured with the opposite party. On 06.08.2010 the above said vehicle was stolen near village Kadapur and FIR No.320 dated 07.08.2010 u/s 379 IPC was registered by Police Station, Sadar, Gurgaon. The police failed to recover the vehicle and thus, filed the Untrace Report of the vehicle u/s 173 Cr.P.C. The complainant informed the opposite party regarding theft of vehicle and submitted the claim form along with required documents. Thereafter opposite party issued a letter bearing Ref No.50/10 dated 04.05.2011 which was replied by the complainant. Opposite party further issued another letter dated 16.06.2011 by which the claim of the complainant has been repudiated wrongly and illegally on the ground of delay in giving intimation to the opposite party. The complainant requested the opposite party to reimburse his claim but of no use. Hence, the opposite party is deficient in providing services to the complainant. The complainant prayed that the opposite party be directed to reimburse the insured amount to the complainant along with interest. He also claimed compensation of Rs.15,000/- for harassment and mental agony. The complaint is supported with an affidavit and the documents placed on file.

2                 OP in its written reply has alleged that the theft allegedly took place on 06.08.2010 and the complainant had informed the opposite party on 14.09.2010  and thus, there was delay in giving intimation to the opposite party which is violation of Condition No.1 of the Insurance Policy. Thus, the claim of the complainant has rightly been repudiated vide letter No.16.06.2011.

3                 We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record available on file.

4                 Therefore, from the facts and circumstances of the case, evidence on the file and the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties,  it emerges that the complainant has filed the present complaint against the OP alleging deficiency of service on its   part on the ground that he got his motorcycle Hero Honda Splendor bearing Regd. No.HR-26-BB-4163 insured with the opposite party bearing registration number of insurance 35070131096201856874 as mentioned in the intimation letter dated 14.09.2010. On 06.08.2010 the above said vehicle was stolen near village Kadapur and FIR No.320 dated 07.08.2010 u/s 379 IPC was registered by Police Station, Sadar, Gurgaon. The police failed to recover the vehicle and thus, filed the Untrace Report of the vehicle. The complainant informed the opposite party and submitted the claim form with documents but the opposite party has wrongly and illegally repudiated the claim of the complainant vide letter dated 16.06.2011.

5                 The contention of the opposite party is that the claim of the complainant has rightly been repudiated vide letter dated 16.06.2011 as the complainant failed to intimate the insurance company about the loss of the company immediately though they were informed on 14.09.2010 while the alleged theft took place on 06.08.2010 and thus there was violation of Terms and Condition No. 1 of the insurance policy.

6                 Therefore, from the facts and circumstances and the evidence placed on file it is evident that theft of the vehicle in dispute took place on 06.08.2010 and to this effect FIR No.320 dated 07.08.2010 u/s 379 IPC was registered with Police Station, Sadar, Gurgaon (Ann-II). Final report u/s 173 Cr.P.C. was filed by the police (Ann-III). The opposite party has repudiated the claim of the complainant solely on the ground that there was delay in reporting the matter to the opposite party. However, Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority vide Ref No.IRDA/HLTH/MISC/CIR/216/09/2011 dated 20.09.2011 has categorically laid down guidelines

“that however, this condition, should not prevent settlement of genuine claims, particularly when there is delay in intimation or in submission of documents due to unavoidable circumstances”.

 

Even the Hon’ble State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Haryana, Panchkula in case First Appeal No.98 of 2014 decided on 03.04.2014 titled Ramesh Yadav vs The New India Assurance Co. Ltd by referring its previous order in First Appeal No. 43 of 2014 titled as Shriram General Insurance Co. Ltd vs Rajesh Kumar decided on March 10^th, 2014 by taking into consideration the Circular dated 20.09.2011 issued by IRDA has held that

 

“that the insurance company could not repudiate the bonafide claims on technical grounds like delay in information and non-submission of documents.”

 

7.                Thus, the repudiation of the claim of the complainant by the opposite party was not justified in view of the circular issued by IRDA and the law laid down by the Hon’ble State Commission as referred above. Therefore, we are inclined to hold that there was deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party. We therefore allow the present complaint and direct the opposite party to pay the insured amount to the complainant along with interest @ 9 % p.a. from the date of filing of the present complaint i.e. 05.08.2011 till realization. The complainant is also entitled to Rs.5,000/- as compensation for harassment and mental agony. The complainant is also entitled to litigation expenses to the tune of Rs.3100/-. The opposite party shall make the compliance of the order of this Forum within 30 days from the date of receipt of the copy of this order.  The parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the records after due compliance.

 

Announced                                                   (Subhash Goyal)

13.08.2015                                                       President,

                                                                   District Consumer Disputes

                                                                   Redressal Forum, Gurgaon

 

 

(Jyoti Siwach)        (Surender Singh Balyan)

Member                 Member