CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-VII

DISTRICT: SOUTH-WEST

GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI

FIRST FLOOR, PANDIT DEEP CHAND SHARMA SAHKAR BHAWAN

CASE NO.CC/330/18

          Date of Institution:-    24.08.2018

          Order Reserved on:- 05.02.2024

                         Date of Decision:-      01.08.2024

IN THE MATTER OF:

Smt. Sadhna Singh

S/o Sh. Pradeep Kumar Singh

R./o S-82, School Block,

Shakarpur, Delhi

                                                                        .….. Complainant

VERSUS

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd.

Through its Manager

C-30, Community Cente, Naraina, New Delhi

.…..Opposite Party

Per R. C. Yadav, Member

1. The brief facts of the case are that thecomplainant has purchased a car Maruti Swift DzireVDi car for an amount of Rs.740950/- from the dealer i.e. Fair deal Car Pvt. Ltd on 27.07.2014. The copy retain invoice of the car is Annexure-1. The complainant has paid the monthly instalment from the date of its purchase. The complainant has got her car bearing registration No.DL5CJ8418, insured with the OPs i.e. the New India Assurance Co. Ltd.  w.e.f. 27.07.2015 to 26.07.2016. The copy of the RC of the car and insurance cover note are annexed as Annexure-2& 3. On 10.02.2016 at about 10.30 PM, the complainant has parked his car at 5/523 school block opposite Goyal Export. On 12.02.2016 at about 9.30 AM, when the complainant reached the place and found that the car has been stolen from that place. The complainant has immediatelylodged on FIR on the same day on 12.02.2016in Police Station Shakarpur, Delhi. The copy of the FIR is annexure-4. On 15.02.2016, the complainant has visited the office of OPs and informed the manager about the incident of the theft of the car on which the manager of the insurance company suggested the complainant to trace out the said car with the help of the Police Official.The manager of the company told the complainant that if the Police fails to trace out the car then come to their office and fill up all the necessary requirement to claim the stolen car. On 04.03.2016, the complainant again visited the OP and lodged the claim and also provided the necessary documents which were provided by the insurance company. The OP has assured the complainant that after completion of survey report and other formalities of the insurance company, the claim of the car will be paid to the complainant. The complainant has visited the OP Company to know about the progress of her vehicle claim but the OPs are already assured the claimant to give insured money of the car very soon. On 03.08.2017, the OP has repudiated the claim without any reason vide letter dated 03.08.2017. Only saying that the complainant informed the insurance company after 21 days. The copy of the letter dated 03.08.2017 is Annexure-5. The complainant has informed the OP Company on 15.02.2016 or early and on the suggestion of OP company, the complainant did her best to trace out her car. The OP Company has done deficiency in service by rejection the claim of the complainant without any reason. The complainant has prayed the insurance amount of Rs.5,21,151/- along with Rs.3 lakh for harassment and Rs.40,000/- towards litigation costs.
2. OP has filed the reply taking several preliminaryobjection that the complainant has informed OP on 04.03.2016 and the car of the complainant had stolen on 12.02.2016. The complainant has informed the insurance company after the lapse of 21 days.The OP has repudiated the claim on 03.08.2017 as per the terms and conditions of the policy.The complainant was required to intimate the loss of insured immediately and in reasonable time. The OP was deprived of necessary investigation about the alleged theft of the car by informing the OP beyond reasonable time. The OP has stated that the car was stolen from Shakarpur area and hence there is no territorial jurisdiction of this Commission. The OP has stated that the complainant has not taken the care of the car properly and has parked his car away from his residence. The complainant has not arranged guard/chowkidar of the safety of the car and hence the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

3. In response to the written statement, the complainant has filed rejoinder reiterating the allegations made in the complaint and denying the allegations levelled in the written statement.

4. The complainant and OP have filed affidavit of evidence as well as written arguments in support of their respective case.

5. The matter was listed for final arguments on 05.02.2024. We have heard Ld. Counsel for the complainant as no one has appeared on behalf of the OP to address the arguments and the case was reserved for orders.

6. We have gone through the entire record carefully and thoroughly.
7. It is the case of the complainant that complainant has purchased a car Maruti Swift DzireVDi car for an amount of Rs.740950/- from the dealer i.e. Fair deal Car Pvt. Ltd on 27.07.2014. The copy retain invoice of the car is Annexure-1. The complainant has paid the monthly instalment from the date of its purchase. The complainant has got her car bearing registration No.DL5CJ8418, insured with the OPs i.e. the New India Assurance Co. Ltd.  w.e.f. 27.07.2015 to 26.07.2016. The copy of the RC of the car and insurance cover note are annexed as Annexure-2& 3. On 10.02.2016 at about 10.30 PM, the complainant has parked his car at 5/523 school block opposite Goyal Export. On 12.02.2016 at about 9.30 AM, when the complainant reached the place and found that the car has been stolen from that place. The complainant has immediately lodged on FIR on the same day on 12.02.2016 in Police Station Shakarpur, Delhi. The copy of the FIR is annexure-4. On 15.02.2016, the complainant has visited the office of OPs and informed the manager about the incident of the theft of the car on which the manager of the insurance company suggested the complainant to trace out the said car with the help of the Police Official. The manager of the company told the complainant that if the Police fails to trace out the car then come to their office and fill up all the necessary requirement to claim the stolen car. On 04.03.2016, the complainant again visited the OP and lodged the claim and also provided the necessary documents which were provided by the insurance company. The OP has assured the complainant that after completion of survey report and other formalities of the insurance company, the claim of the car will be paid to the complainant. The complainant has visited the OP Company to know about the progress of her vehicle claim but the OPs are already assured the claimant to give insured money of the car very soon. On 03.08.2017, the OP has repudiated the claim without any reason vide letter dated 03.08.2017. Only saying that the complainant informed the insurance company after 21 days. The copy of the letter dated 03.08.2017 is Annexure-5. The complainant has informed the OP Company on 15.02.2016 or early and on the suggestion of OP company, the complainant did her best to trace out her car. The OP Company has done deficiency in service by rejection the claim of the complainant without any reason.
8. It is admitted case of the OP that car was stolen from 10.02.2016 to 12.02.2016 from Shakarpur area and the complainant informed the OP on 04.03.2016 and the OP has repudiated the claim with the reason that the complainant has informed the OP after lapse of 21 days.
9. In National Insurance Co. Ltd. VsNitinKhadelwal (2008) 11 SCC 259 and AmalenduSahoovs Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. (2010) 4 SCC 536, it was held by their lordship that even if there was a breach of that clause, the claim could not have been repudiated in toto and applying the yard stick in AmalenduSahoo, Supra 75% of the claim as admissible amount on the non-standard basis was awarded.
10. The complainant has paid consideration for insurance of his car but he OP has repudiated the claim for the delay intimation for 21 days.
11. The OP has wrongfully rejected the claim. There is deficiency of service on the part of the OP.
12. The complaint of the complainant is allowed to the effect that OP shall pay the car insurance amount i.e. Rs.5,21,151/- along with interest @7% from the date of repudiation of the claim i.e. 03.08.2017 to the complainant till its realization.The complainant is also entitled for compensation on account of mental harassment and litigation expenses to the tune of Rs.50,000/-. The OP are directed to comply with the order within 45 days from the receipt of the order failing which complainant will be entitled for interest @7% p.a. on the amount of mental harassment and litigation charges i.e. from the date of order till its realization.

• A copy of this order is to be sent to all the parties as per rule.
• File be consigned to record room.
• Announced in the open court on 01.08.2024.