Haryana

Bhiwani

CC/124/2022

Surender Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

NIA - Opp.Party(s)

Nagender Tanwar

18 Nov 2024

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSASL COMMISSION, BHIWANI.

                                                                     Complaint Case No. :124 of 2022

                                                                     Date of Institution    :  23.06.2022

                                                                     Date of decision:      : 18.11.2024

 

Surender Singh son of Sh. Bhim Singh R/o H.No.334, Jagat Colony, Bhiwani, Tehsil and District Bhiwani.

                                                  ...Complainant 

 

                                                    Versus

1. The New India Assurance Company Ltd., 1215, 12^th Floor, Norang House, 21 Kasturba Gandhi Marg, New Delhi-110001 through its General Manager.
2. Branch Manager, The New India Assurance Company Ltd., Opp. Ch. Bansi Lal Civil Hospital, Near Ghantaghar Chowk, Bhiwani.

                                   ...Opposite parties

 

COMPLAINT U/S 35 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 2019.

Before: -       Mrs. Saroj Bala Bohra, Presiding Member.

                    Ms.  Shashi Kiran Panwar, Member.

Present:        Sh. Nagender Singh Tanwar, Advocate for complainant.

Sh. Sanjay Sharma Kharkiya, Advocate for OP.

 

                                                  ORDER

 

SHASHI KIRAN PANWAR,  MEMBER:

1.                 Brief facts of this case are that complainant being owner of vehicle Swift Dzire ZDI car bearing registration No.HR-26BH/0177 (in short the vehicle) got it insured from OPs for a period from 17.02.2017 to 18.02.2018.  On 13.02.2018, the vehicle was stolen from Mega City Mall, Gurugram and FIR No.132 dated 14.02.2018 U/s 379 IPC was registered at P.S. DLF 29 Gurugram, in this regard. Complainant has submitted that police failed to trace out the vehicle and untraced report so submitted by police was accepted by the Court concerned vide order dated 07.09.2020. As per complainant, OP insurance company was informed about theft of the vehicle and he deposited all necessary documents with the OP qua release of the claim of vehicle but the OP did not pay any heed to his genuine requests despite issuance of legal notice dated 26.05.2022. Hence, the present complaint has been preferred by complainant alleging deficiency in service on the part of OP resulting into monetary loss to him besides mental and physical harassment. In the end, prayer has been made to direct the OPs to pay claim amount of Rs.3,21,275/- alongwith interest @ 18% per annum. Also to pay Rs.1.00 lac as compensation for harassment.

2.                 Upon notice, OPs appeared and filed written statement raising preliminary objections qua locus standi, maintainability of complaint, complaint being time barred and suppression of material facts. On merits, it is admitted that vehicle was under insurance cover for the relevant period and on receipt of theft information, Sh. Kailash Sharma, Adv. & Investigator was deputed for investigation into the matter who submitted his report. In the end, denied for any deficiency in service and prayed for dismissal of the complaint with costs.

3.                 Complainant in evidence, tendered his affidavit Ex.CW1/A alongwith documents Ex. C-1 to Ex. C-9 and closed the evidence.

4.                 On the other side, Ld. counsel for OPs tendered in evidence affidavit Ex. RW1/A of Mr. Anjana Miistgry, authorized person of OP company alongwith documents Annexure-1 to Annexure-4 and closed the evidence.

5.                 We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record minutely. Written arguments on behalf of complainant filed.

6.                 At the outset, the OP insurance company closed the claim file of complainant on the grounds that he did not provide documents sought vide letters Annexure-1 to Annexure-4, viz. 1. Final police report & Untraceable report duly accepted by the Court. 2. Copy of letter of intimation of theft of vehicle given to RTO, Gurugaon. 3. If there is any service, Petrol, Toll Slips before theft, please submit. 4. Original Purchase invoice of theft vehicle. 5. Original Insurance policy of theft vehicle.  6. Original key of theft vehicle. 7. Latest NCRB report. 8. News Paper cutting of theft vehicle. 9. Any other information to enable us to process the claim.

7.                 Complainant in order to prove his case has placed on record copy of FIR (Ex.C-6) whereby it is observed that the vehicle in question was theft on 13.02.2018 and that on the day of occurrence, the vehicle was under insurance cover (Ex.C-5) having IDV of Rs.3,21,275/- and that complainant is registered owner of the vehicle in question. It is evident from the final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. (Ex.C-7) that during the investigation of police, the vehicle remained untraceable. Ld. counsel for complainant has argued that despite lodging of claim and submitting all necessary documents, the OP insurance company has not released the claim which amounts to deficiency in service on their part causing the complainant huge monetary loss as well as mental and physical harassment.  

8.                 On the other side, learned counsel for OP has argued that despite issuance of various letters to complainant, he did not provide the required documents to process the claim, as such, his claim was closed. As such, the counsel has denied for any deficiency in service on the part of OP and vehemently argued for dismissal of the complaint with heavy costs.

9.                 After hearing learned counsels for the parties and going through the record, we are of the considered view that on the day of theft, the vehicle was under insurance cover and despite best efforts by police, it has not been traced out and as per pleadings of complainant duly supported with affidavit, the Court concerned accepted such report of the police. Therefore, the complainant is entitled to get IDV of the vehicle. As such, we are of the view that the documents placed on record by complainant are sufficient to release the claim of stolen vehicle. Accordingly the complaint is allowed and OPs, jointly and severally, are directed to comply with the following directions within 40 days from the date of passing of this order:-

(i)       To pay a sum of Rs.3,21,275/- (Rs. Three lac twenty one thousand two hundred seventy five) as IDV of the vehicle in question, to the complainant alongwith simple interest @ 9% per annum from the date of institution of complaint till its realization subject to execution of letter of Subrogation and all other formalities qua transfer of the vehicle in the name of OP insurance company within 15 days from the date of receiving certified copy of this order.

(ii)      And to pay a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rs. Twenty thousand) as compensation for harassment.

(iii)     Also to pay a sum of Rs.5500/- (Rs. Five thousand five hundred) on account of litigation expenses.

                    In case of default, the awarded amount mentioned in column (i) shall attract simple interest @ 12% per annum for the period of default.  If this order is not complied with, then the complainant shall be entitled to the execution petition under section 71 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 and in that eventuality, the opposite parties may also be liable for prosecution under Section 72 of the said Act which envisages punishment of imprisonment, which may extend to three years or fine upto rupees one lac or with both.  Copies of this order be sent to the parties concerned, free of costs within rules. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance. 

Announced.

Dated:18.11.2024