Haryana

Sonipat

348/2014

Aggarwal Medical Store - Complainant(s)

Versus

oriental Insurance Company Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

L.K. Doda

25 Aug 2015

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SONEPAT.

                                                      

                                    Complaint No.348 of 2014

                                    Instituted on:16.12.2014

                                    Date of order:25.08.2015

 

 

Aggarwal Medical Store, Railway road, Ganaur through Prop. Rajiv Kumar r/o Railway road Ganaur.

     …….Complainant

                   VERSUS

 

 

Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Atlas road, Sonepat through Branch Manager.

 ……..Respondent.

 

COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 12 OF

THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986

 

Argued by: Sh. LK Doda, Adv. for complainant.

           Sh. Ajay Garg, Adv. for respondent.

 

 

BEFORE-   Nagender Singh, President.

          Smt. Prabha Wati, Member.

          D.V. Rathi, Member.

 

O R D E R

 

        Complainant has filed the present complaint against the respondent alleging therein that he has purchased a shopkeeper insurance policy from the respondent and on 6.1.2012 one  customer burglar the goods which were placed on counter and picked up all the medicines etc. without paying any amount and the cost of the said items was Rs.30676/-. The complainant intimated the respondent regarding the incident and FIR no.6 dated 7.1.2012 was lodged.  The complainant completed all the formalities and submitted all the required documents with the respondent, but the respondent did not give any reply regarding the settlement of the claim and that amounts to a grave deficiency in service on the part of the respondent. So, he has come to this Forum and has filed the present complaint.

2.       In reply, the respondent has submitted that the policy in question is shopkeepers insurance policy and it covers the loss in the premises by burglary and house breaking.  Sh. Pankaj Rohila, Surveyor and Loss Assessor has found the loss to the tune of Rs.29826/- and recommended a deduction of 25% from this amount and that comes to Rs.7456/- and he found the actual loss to the tune of Rs.22370/-.  But the loss to the insured is not covered under the insurance policy, hence the respondent has no liability to pay this amount also to the complainant.

3.       We have heard both the learned counsel for the parties at length and have also gone through the entire case file very carefully.

4.       Ld. Counsel for the respondent has vehemently argued that the policy in question is shopkeepers insurance policy and it covers the loss in the premises by burglary and house breaking.  Sh. Pankaj Rohila, Surveyor and Loss Assessor has found the loss to the tune of Rs.29826/- and recommended a deduction of 25% from this amount and that comes to Rs.7456/- and he found the actual loss to the tune of Rs.22370/-.  But the loss to the insured is not covered under the insurance policy, hence the respondent has no liability to pay this amount also to the complainant.

         To rebut the above contentions, ld. Counsel for the complainant has submitted while relying on section 378 of Indian Penal Code which is reproduced below:-

378. Theft-Whoever, intending to take dishonestly any moveable property out of the possession of any person without that person’s consent, moves that property in order to such taking, is said to commit theft.

         So, the respondent cannot escape from their legal liability by taking lame excuse that the policy in question is shopkeepers insurance policy and it covers the loss in the premises by burglary and house breaking.

         In the present case, the surveyor has assessed the loss of Rs.29826/-.  As per the complainant, he has suffered the loss to the tune of Rs.30676/-.

         We have perused the document R1 i.e. terms and conditions of shopkeepers insurance policy.  In our view, the claim of the complainant covers under clause 5(i)(a) which is mentioned below and as per this clause, definitely the respondent is liable to make the payment of the claim amount to the complainant:-

         “In the event of theft lodge forthwith a complaint with the police and take all practicable steps to apprehend the guilty person or persons and to recover the property lost.”

         So, in our view, the complainant is entitled to get the amount of Rs.29826/- from the respondent as was assessed by the surveyor and loss assessor.  Accordingly, we hereby direct the respondent insurance company to make the payment of Rs.29826/- to the complainant alongwith interest at the rate of 09% per annum from the date of filing of the present complaint till realization and further to compensate the complainant to the tune of Rs.4000/-(Rs.four thousands) for rendering deficient services, for harassment and under the head of litigation expenses.

         With these observations, findings and directions, the present complaint stands allowed.

         Certified copies of order be provided to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record-room.

 

 

 

(Prabha Devi-Member)    (D.V.Rathi)         (Nagender Singh-President)

DCDRF, Sonepat.      DCDRF, Sonepat.      DCDRF Sonepat.

 

Announced 25.08.2015