DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION SAS NAGAR (MOHALI)
Consumer Complaint No.40 of 2019
Date of institution: 10.01.2019 Date of decision : 19.10.2020
Mohinder Singh Chaudhary son of Shri Ramji Lal Chaudhary, aged about 38 years resident of VPO Mehraj, District Bathinda, Punjab.
…….Complainant
Versus
New India Assurance Company Limited, DO-II, Opposite Income Tax Office, Leela Bhawan, Patiala through its Branch Manager.
……..Opposite Party
Complaint under Consumer Protection Act.
Quorum: Shri Sanjiv Dutt Sharma, President.
Mrs. Natasha Chopra, Member
Shri Inderjit, Member.
Present: Shri Devinder Kumar, counsel for the complainant.
Shri J.P. Nahar, counsel for the OP.
Order dictated by :- Shri Sanjiv Dutt Sharma, President.
Order
The present order of ours will dispose of a complaint under Consumer Protection Act, filed by the complainant (hereinafter referred as ‘CC’ for short) against the Opposite Party (hereinafter referred as ‘OP’ for short). The CC subscribed the services of the OP as he got insured his Volkswagon Vento Car bearing registration No.PB-03-AM-6999 with the OP, by paying a premium of Rs.28,651/-. Accordingly, an insurance policy was issued by the OP, which was valid from 03.09.2016 to 02.09.2017. The car of the CC was under hypothecation with the Punjab National Bank, Mehraj, District Bathinda. The CC had been paying installments to the bank regularly. On 30.08.2017 the car of the CC was stolen by unknown persons from Mohali. The CC gave intimation to the police and FIR No.189 dated 31.08.2017 under Section 379 IPC was registered at Police Station Phase-1, SAS Nagar (Mohali). After the investigation, police submitted the un-traceable report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. The CC also gave intimation to the OP and on the instructions of the OP, submitted all the requisite documents in the office of the OP. The surveyor deputed by the OP submitted his report but copy of the same was withheld and was not supplied to the CC by the OP. Thereafter, the CC contacted the OP a number of times and also sent letter dated 26.07.2018, but OP failed to settle the claim of the CC. Instead of settling the genuine claim of the CC, the OP vide email dated 26.07.2018 raised the following objections as under:
- Late intimation of the claim to the OP.
- Eng. No. and Ch. No. not mentioned in the FIR and non traceable report.
c. 2nd key of the car was not handed over to the investigator.
The CC vide email dated 30.07.2018 submitted clarification on all the aforesaid objections raised by the OP. The OP instead of verifying the facts, with malafide intention to harass the CC sent email dated 30.07.2018 to furnish the confirmation from Bhagat Motors and Punjab National Bank. Despite receipt of requisite documents, the OP again issued letter dated 08.08.2018 to the CC that in the FIR dated 31.08.2017 and non traceable report dated 27.04.2018 Engine Number and Chassis number of the vehicle are missing, which are basic requirement for the theft claim. The CC approached Police Station at Mohali and RTO Bathinda and obtained the certificate and Form No.24 which was submitted to the OP vide letter dated 06.09.2018 with the request to release the claim amount. The OP just to harass the CC again vide letter dated 12.09.2018 asked the CC to get the Engine Number and Chassis number in the FIR and in the untraceable report incorporated. On receipt of this letter, the CC again approached the police officials, with the request to insert the engine number and chassis number in the FIR but the police officials informed that at this stage it is not possible to insert the same in the FIR. However, the police officials stated that vehicle number has been mentioned in the FIR. Then the CC explained the whole matter to the OP and requested that in case the OP wants any further clarification, the same can be obtained from the police and RTO Bathinda by its surveyor. Till date the OP has not settled the claim of the CC.
Thus, alleging deficiency in service on the part of the OP, the CC has sought the following relief:
(a) to pay him a sum of Rs.8,68,586/- being IDV value of the car with interest @ 12% from the date of loss.
(b) to pay him Rs.2,00,000/- as compensation for harassment and mental agony and Rs.55,000/- as litigation expenses.
Complaint of the CC is duly signed. Further the same is also supported by an affidavit of the CC.
2. The OP has contested the complaint by filing its version. In the preliminary objection, the OP has averred that the vehicle is hypothecated with the Punjab National Bank but the bank has not been made a party in the present complaint. Though the OP has not admitted the liability, but it is stated that if the amount towards the loss, if at all is payable, the same should be paid only to the Bank. Even the bank has sent a letter dated 01.02.2018 to the OP requesting to pay the amount of claim to the bank. The complaint is also premature as the CC has not submitted the documents demanded vide email dated 26.07.2018, letters dated 08.08.2018, 12.09.2018 and 01.02.2019 and thus the OP had closed the claim as “No Claim” vide letter dated 18.02.2019. Instead of submitting the required documents, the CC has filed the present complaint to pressurize the OP to settle the claim. On merits, it is averred that there is a delay in intimation of theft to the OP as the CC had given intimation on 19.01.2018, whereas the theft had already taken place on 30.08.2017 which is violation of condition No.1 of the insurance policy. As per condition No.1 of the insurance policy, the insured is required to give notice in writing immediately upon occurrence of any accident or loss or damage. In the present case, there is delay of 142 days in giving information to the OP. The OP has rightly pointed out that the engine number and chassis number have to be got incorporated in the FIR as the actual identification of the vehicle is done through engine number and chassis number. If any person replaces the registration number plate, it is not possible to identify whether the vehicle stolen is the same as is mentioned in the FIR. Though OP has not admitted its liability, but even then the settlement of the claim would be subject to the conditions (a) to (f) mentioned in Para No.23 of version of the OP. Denying any unfair trade practice on its part, the OP has sought dismissal of the complaint.
3. Both the parties produced their entire evidence at the time of filing their respective versions. Counsel for the parties also stated at the time of arguments that they do not want to file any more documents. Written arguments filed by both the parties and oral arguments have also been heard.
4. Admittedly the CC had subscribed an insurance policy for his Vento Car from the OP by paying a premium to the tune of Rs.28,651/-. Admittedly the insurance policy was also covering theft of the vehicle. It is also an admitted fact that the car was under hypothecation with the Punjab National Bank, Mehraj, District Bathinda. It is also not in dispute that the CC was not paying installments to the bank regularly. Admittedly the bank is not a party to the dispute. It is also on the file that on 30.08.2017 car of the CC was stolen from Mohali which is prima facie proved by FIR No.189 dated 31.08.2017 under Section 379 IPC, PS Phase-1, SAS Nagar Ex.C-4. It is also admitted by the OP that the CC duly informed the OP regarding theft of his car. Admittedly the untraceable report was furnished by the CC with the OP. Surprisingly the OP has not submitted the surveyor report which is definitely a vital document. Non supply of surveyor report in the Commission by OP definitely falls within the purview of suppression of true and correct facts. We feel that instead of settling the genuine claim of the CC, the OP has raised some flimsy grounds based on surmises and conjectures. The OP has raised objection that the CC had not informed the insurance company immediately. The other objection raised by the OP is that engine number and chassis is not mentioned in the FIR or in the untraceable report and also the second key of the car is not handed over by the CC.
5. We feel that all these three objections are vague, absurd and make no sense. It was not possible for the CC to provide the engine number and chassis number without the help of the registration certificate which had also gone with the car. The CC had been telling the OP to provide second key of the car as and when required by the OP. We feel that there is no late intimation to the OP since the CC had immediately lodged the FIR, the moment his car was stolen. We feel that the grounds on which the OP was delaying the claim of the CC are flimsy and further shows the malafide intention of the OP. It is also writ large on the file that the OP had been harassing the CC by not settling his claim. It is generally seen that now a days it has become a practice by the insurance companies to harass the innocent customers by not settling their claims and hanging on the matters on baseless grounds. From the perusal of evidence on record, it is proved on file that the CC is entitled to the claim to the tune of Rs.8,68,586/- from the OP.
6. Accordingly the present complaint is allowed. The OP is directed to pay to the CC an amount to the tune of Rs.8,66,000/- (Rs. Eight Lakhs Sixty Six Thousand only) alongwith interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing the complaint. The OP is further burdened to pay a consolidated compensation to the tune of Rs.25,000/- (Rs. Twenty Five Thousand only) to the CC. It is further ordered that the amount of Rs.25,000/- will be paid by the Branch Manager of the OP who had been intentionally delaying the genuine claim of the CC and had been causing mental and physical harassment to the poor complainant. On the other hand it is also directed that the CC will supply the second key of the car to the OP. It is also directed that OP will deposit the balance amount of the loan with the concerned bank within 30 days and will pay the remaining amount to the CC. Certified copies of the orders be supplied to the parties as per rules. File be consigned to record in accordance with rules.
Announced
October 19, 2020
(Sanjiv Dutt Sharma)
President
(Mrs. Natasha Chopra)
Member
(Inderjit)
Member
