DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION CAMP COURT AT LUDHIANA

Received by way of transfer Consumer Complaint No.306 of 2018

                                            Date of institution:04.05.2018

                                            Date of Decision:03.10.2022

1. M/s Elbrina enterprises Private Limited, 4039, Street No.1, Hargobindpura, Ludhiana through its Director Vijay Jindal, son of Sh. Tirath Dass Jindal, Ludhiana
2. Vijay Jindal son of Sh. Tirath Dass Jindal, Director of Jindal Fibers Private Limited, 4039, Street No.1, Hargobindpura, Ludhiana. 

…….Complainant

Versus

1. The Regional Manager, New India Assurance Company Limited, 108, Surya Towers, 4^th Floor, The Mall, Ludhiana
2. The New India Assurance Company Limited, Registered and HO New India Assurance Building, MG Road, Fort, Mumbai-400001. 

                                                          ……..Opposite Parties

 QUORUM:   

   HON’BLE MR. RANJIT SINGH, PRESIDENT.

                  HON’BLE MRS. RANVIR KAUR, MEMBER

PRESENT:

Sh. LD Gupta, Adv. for complainant

Sh. G.S. Kalyan, Adv. for OPs

ORDER

RANVIR KAUR, MEMBER

1. The present order of ours will dispose of the above complaint filed under Consumer Protection Act, by the complainant against the Opposite Parties on the ground that the complainant No.1 is a private limited firm duly registered with the Ministry of Corporate Affairs, Chandigarh. This complaint is being filed through its Director Vijay Jindal son of Tirath Dass Jindal, resident of House No.47-48-A, Rajgur Nagar, Ludhiana, who has been duly authorized by the complaint till the claim is sanctioned by the OPs. In order to safeguard its cash from all types of perils the complainant firm obtained money insurance policy from the opposite parties. This policy was valid from 12.00.01 AM of 18.1.2017 to 11.59.59 PM of 17.1.2018. In this policy ash lying in the factory and in transit upto 2.5 Lacs was insured. The complainants paid Rs.851/- as one year premium of this policy. The complainant has been purchasing/renewing this policy since last so many years. On 16.5.2017 at about 7.30 PM the complainant No.2 left his office situated at Street No.1, Hargobindpura, Ludhiana for his residence situated at House No.47-48, Rajguru Nagar, Ludhiana, in his innova car along with Sh. Jagmel Singh who was driving this car. Since one of his relatives was admitted in ICU ward of Satguru Partap Singh Appolo Hospital, Ludhiana, so, he decided to visit his relative. When he reached at the hospital gate of said hospital, he went inside the hospital and his driver parked the car in the open space opposite the hospital gate. The complainant No.2 got out of this car and left his briefcase containing Rs.3,52,000/- in cash and some papers of income tax and of Raghunath Hospital, Ludhiana, in this case. This cash belonged to his factories. Since it was extremely hot day of summer, so the driver of the car and stood nearby the car to get some fresh air and to save himself from sweltering hot inside the car. At about 7.55 PM the complainant No.2 was informed by his driver that somebody has stolen the briefcase which was lying in the car after smashing the glass of the right hand side gate of back seat of this car and ran away. The complainant No.2 along with his son in law at once rushed towards his car and found that glass of the right hand side gate of the rear seat of his car was smashed and his briefcase containing Rs.3,52,000/- and some income tax and Raghunath hospital was missing. It is further alleged that the complainant No.2 immediately informed the police on 100 number but the call did not mature. Then his son in law informed the police which arrived within minutes along with SHO and other police personal. They inspected the broken glass of the car and questioned the people standing nearby including the driver of this car. When no clue was found then the complainant No. l was directed to lodge the FIR in the complainant No.2 along with his son in law went to Sherpur. Police Station and narrated about this theft. The incharge of police station heard the whole incident and assured that proper investigation in to this crime will be made and strenuous efforts will be made to recover the stolen goods. He further informed the complainant No.2 that since the SHO of PS Sherpur was not in the police station so the FIR will be registered on next date. However, after few visits finally the FIR was registered on 18.5.2017. Inspite of efforts the police could neither trace the culprits nor recover the briefcase containing Rs.3,52,000/- in cash and other documents. Ultimately, the incharge police station, Sherpur wrote a letter dated 03.11.2017 to the Commissioner of Police, Ludhiana, and sought permission to close this case as untraceable. Thereafter, the police filed closure report of this FIR No.158 of 18.5.2017 under Section 173 of CRPC. The incident of this theft was widely reported in the news papers also. After this theft took place the complainant No.2 also informed the OP insurance Company through his email dated 17.5.2017 about this theft. The OP deputed Sh. Rajesh Mahajan as Surveyor to assess the loss and appointed M/s Krish Investigators to investigate the whole matter. It is further alleged that investigators vide its email dated 18.5.2017 asked the complainant about the details and the amount of cash lost in this incident. The complainant No.2 immediately informed the OP that loss arising out of this policy was Rs.1,50,000/-. The complainant also got repaired and fixed the new window pane of the right hand side gate of rear seat of the car which was broken in this theft and also repair of the rear door of the car, which was also damaged. On 10.11.2017, the investigators asked the complainants to supply certain documents such as FIR and copy of balance sheet of the complainant firm etc. All the documents were supplied immediately. Even after this the OP continued asking the complainants to supply various documents and information. The complainants meticulously supplied all the documents and information so required by the OPs. The OP vide totally ambiguous, vague, non speaking stereotyped and cryptic letter dated 3.4.2018 repudiated this genuine and bonafide claim a No Claim. Thus, alleging deficiency in service on the part of the OPs. Therefore, the complainant prayed for the following reliefs against the OPs:- 

1. To set aside the repudiation letter

2. To pay Rs.1,50,000/- as claim amount along with interest @ 18% per annum

3. To pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation

4. Any other additional or alternative relief to which the complainant is found entitled to in the facts and circumstances of the case to the complainant.

2. Upon notice, the OPs have filed written reply taking preliminary objections; that the complaint is not maintainable; that the complainant has no cause of action to file the present complaint. On merits, it is stated that on receipt of the claim intimation on 17.5.2017, under policy No. 36010048170300000013 A/c Jindal Wooltex Industries Private Limited, Policy No. 36010048170300000014 A/c Jindal Fibers, Policy No.3600048160300000030 A/c M/s Elbrina Private Limited in money insurance. The OP immediately deputed Rajesh Mahajan, Surveyors/Loss Assessors, 277, Model Gram, Ludhiana, to Survey the loss and also deputed Krish Associates, Investigators, Detectives, Tracers, Claim Settling Agent, 5135 & 5175, Anand Nagar, Near Chander Nagar, Ludhiana to investigate the genuineness of the claim. During investigation, the said investigator recorded the statement of the witnesses and collected the documents and submitted his report dated 10.03.2018 observation that loss does not within the scope of policy.   Thus, alleging no deficiency in service on the part of answering OPs and prayed for dismissal the complaint. 
3. In support of the complaint, the complainant has tendered various documents. On the other hand, the OPs has also tendered documents in support of their evidence.
4. We have heard the learned counsel for the complainant and have gone through the record of the file, carefully.
5. The claim of the OP that non traceable report was not provided by the complainant, has been specially rebutted by corroboration through documents by the complainant. Objection that the vehicle was left unattended. Complainant has proved on record that his driver was with the vehicle at the relevant time, who had gone out of the vehicle just to enjoy fresh air and to have a retrieve from acute heat and that he was standing nearby when the occurrence took place. As regards, the objection by the OP that the complainant deviated his route, the complainant has proved that he remained with the distance of 50 Ks, the hospital is situated in the middle of the city, was parked outside the hospital where numerous other vehicles were parked. Further the complainant was not joined in the survey investigation and was never given any opportunity to put his point, before preparing the relevant report on the basis of which his claim has been repudiated. Further, it is well settled law that under the consumer act the claim cannot be repudiated on technical and flimsy grounds.
6. In the totality of circumstances, the case of the complainant succeeded. Stolen amount of comes within the limit of sum assured, consequently, the complainant is entitled to the amount of equal to the stolen amount of Rs.52,000/- due from the date of theft with interest @ 7% per annum till payment. He is entitled to Rs.30,000/- as compensation with Rs. 15,000/- as litigation expenses. Free certified copies of this order be sent to the parties, as per rules. The file be sent back to the District Consumer Commission, Ludhiana, for consigning the same to the Record Room.
7.  

October 03, 2022

(Ranjit Singh)

(Ranvir Kaur)