Delhi

East Delhi

cc/731/2013

Dost Fincap Pvt - Complainant(s)

Versus

NEW India Assurance - Opp.Party(s)

30 Oct 2013

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM (EAST)

GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI

               CONVIENIENT SHOPPING CENTRE, SAINI ENCLAVE: DELHI-92

 

CASE NO-731/13
 

Dost Fincap Pvt. Ltd.

75, Vijay Block, 2^nd Floor

Vikas Marg, Delhi-110092.

 

Complainant

Vs

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd.

Delhi Regional Office-II (320000)

Core-1, 10^th Floor Scope Minar

Laxmi Nagar District Centre

Delhi-110092.

Opposite Party

 

                                                                                   DATE OF ADMISSION-28/08/2013

                                                                                      DATE OF ORDER       - 21/08/2015

Sh. SUBHASH GUPTA (MEMBER)

 

The complainant a company incorporated under the Companies Act 1956 has filed the present complaint on the premise that vehicle No.DL-1PA-7316 was financed by it on loan cum hypothecation basis. The said vehicle was duly insured with the OP for the period 28/11/2011 to 27/11/2012 on IDV of Rs. 2,00,000/-. It is averred in the complaint that the RC as well insurance policy was endorsed in favour of the Complainant. It is further stated in the complaint that in the intervening night of 18/19/08/2012 the said vehicle was stolen and a complaint was lodged at the NOIDA police station. It is apparent from the documents on the record that Mr. Balbir Singh Bisht was the registered owner of the above said vehicle and his claim was repudiated by the OP on the ground of delay of intimation of the theft to the insurance company.

                               Before going into the merits of the case, we have to decide about locus standii  and maintainability of the complainant of the present complaint against the OP before this Forum. From the records, it is apparent that the registered owner Sh. Balbir Singh Bisht has got insurance of this vehicle in his name; he has lodged the complaint with the police and intimated the insurance company about the theft of the vehicle. We find that the policy has been issued in the name of Sh. Balbir Singh Bisht and not in the name of company. So, no cause of action in our view in favour of the complainant  has arisen against the OP, further, there is no privity of contract between the complainant and OP for insured vehicle, when no privity of contract exists between the complainant and OP, the Complainant has no locus standii to file the present complaint. Hence dismissed.

                               Copy of the order be served to the parties as per rule.

                                                                                      

 

SUBHASH GUPTA                   POONAM MALHOTRA               N.A. ZAIDI

   (MEMBER)                                     (MEMBER)                      (PRESIDENT)