Rajasthan

StateCommission

A/1596/2016

Vikas Jhakad s/o Virendra Jhakad - Complainant(s)

Versus

Oriental Insurance Company Limited through Majnager - Opp.Party(s)

Kamal Chamria

23 May 2017

ORDER

BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,RAJASTHAN,JAIPUR BENCH NO.1

 

FIRST APPEAL NO: 1596/2016

 

Vikash Jhakad s/o Virendra Jhakad Flat No. 302/B Star Residency, Heera Nagar, DCM Ajmer Road, Jaipur.

Vs.

 

Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., 3^rd floor, Anand Bhawan,Sansar Chandra Road,Jaipur

 

Date of Order 23.5.2017

 

Before:

Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Nisha Gupta- President

 

Mr. Kamal Chamaria counsel for the appellant

Mr. Ravi Tripathi counsel for respondent

 

BY THE STATE COMMISSION ( PER HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE NISHA GUPTA,PRESIDENT):

 

This appeal has been filed against the order passed by the

2

 

District Forum, Jaipur 3^rd dated 9.12.2016 whereby the claim is disallowed on the ground that insurance company was never informed.

 

The contention of the appellant is that accident has taken place on 25.8.2008. Insurance Company was informed timely and this fact has also been admitted in reply of the insurance company. Relevant documents were also submitted even the surveyor was appointed hence, the claim should have been allowed.

 

Per contra the contention of the respondent is that insurance company was not informed timely hence, the claim has rightly been repudiated.

 

Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned judgment as well as original record of the case.

 

There is no dispute about the fact that the accident has taken place on 25.8.2008 and it has been pleaded by the appellant that insurance company was informed timely and relevant documents were also submitted. In reply to the

3

 

complaint in opening para the fact has been admitted by the insurance company that they were informed about the accident on 27.8.2008 hence, there was reason for the insurance company to repudiate the claim on the ground of delayed information.

 

The respondent has relied upon Anx. A 2 wherein on 11.2.2009 it has been stated by the appellant that he could not inform the insurance company in writing. Be that may be the case in view of the admission of the respondent that he was informed timely the claim could not be repudiated on the ground of delay. It may also be noted that Ravindra Kumar Sharma was appointed as surveyor and he assessed the loss at Rs. 99,563.25.

 

The other contention of the respondent is that relevant documents have not been submitted which were asked from the appellant vide Anx. NA 6 on 19.5.2009. The appellant has rightly relied on the report of the surveyor which contains the particulars of driver including driving licence number, date of issue and effectiveness and further more surveyor has assessed the loss on the basis of claim form, registration certificate,

4

 

driving licence etc. hence it cannot be accepted that the relevant documents asked by the insurance company vide Anx. A 6 i.e. registration, driving licence, crane bill have not been submitted to the insurance company. The categorical contention of the appellant is that FIR was not lodged of the incident as none was injured. Hence, in view of the above the claim should have been allowed and findings of the Forum below are liable to be set aside.

 

The appeal is allowed and the appellant is entitled for the amount of Rs. 99,563/- alongwith 9% interest from the date of presentation of the complaint i.e. 31.1.2011. Further the appellant will get Rs. 5000/- as cost of proceedings. The order be complied within one month.

 

(Nisha Gupta )

President

 

nm