DISTRICT   CONSUMER   DISPUTES   REDRESSAL FORUM, GURGAON-122001.

                                                                                                      Consumer Complaint No: 155 of 2010                                                                                                                                               Date of Institution: 26.02.2010                                                                                                                                             Date of Decision: 11.03.2016.

Bindu s/o Shri Dharamvir, R/o Village Tikli, Tehsil and District Gurgaon.

                                                                                        ……Complainant.

                                                Versus

Oriental Insurance Company Ltd, D.O. G.T. Road, Opposite Bus Stand, Karnal (through D.M. Gurgaon)

                                                                              ..Opposite party

Complaint under Sections 12 & 14 of Consumer Protection Act,1986                                                                  

BEFORE:     SHRI SUBHASH GOYAL, PRESIDENT

SMT JYOTI SIWACH, MEMBER

                   SH.SURENDER SINGH BALYAN, MEMBER.

Present:        Shri Dinesh Sharma, Adv for the complainant.     

                    Sh. R.D.Sharma, Adv for the OP.

ORDER       SUBHASH GOYAL, PRESIDENT.

The case of the complainant, in brief, is that he got his Bolero Jeep bearing Regd. No. HR-55-H-6216 insured with the opposite party vide Cover Note No.005383 which was valid from 01.12.2008 to 30.11.2009. On 21.03.2009 the complainant had gone to Balaji for Darshan and the same was parked near Panchmukhi Dharamshala Balaji but when the complainant came back the Jeep was found missing  and in this regard FIR No.72/2009 dated 22.03.2009  u/s 379 IPC P.S.Manpura was registered.  The complainant immediately informed the opposite party who registered Claim No.2613007/31/2009/000500. The complainant completed the required formalities and also submitted the untraced report duly issued by Hon’ble Chief Judicial Magistrate. He requested the opposite party to reimburse his claim but of no use. He also got issued a legal notice upon the opposite party but of no avail. He prayed that the opposite party be directed to reimburse the claim of the complainant with interest. He also sought compensation to the tune of Rs. 2 Lacs and cost of litigation to the tune of Rs.22,000/-.

2.                The opposite party in its written reply has alleged that as per the terms and conditions of the insurance policy of Bolero Jeep bearing Regd. No.HR-55-H-6216 the owner was required to submit papers under section 134(C) of the Motor Vehicle Act but there has been no such information and the owner of the vehicle has not submitted any papers. However, the Bolero Jeep Model 2008 in question was not insured with the OP from 01.12.2008 to 30.11.2009. Thus, there has been no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party.

3                 We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record available on file.

4                 After going through the facts and circumstances of the case, evidence on file and the arguments advanced by the parties it emerges that the complainant has filed the present complaint against the opposite party alleging deficiency of service on their part on the ground that he was registered owner of vehicle bearing Regd. No.HR-55-H-6216 and the same was insured with the OP vide Cover Note No.005383 which was valid from 01.12.2008 to 30.11.2009. However, the vehicle met with an accident on 21.03.2009 and in this regard FIR No.72 of 2009 u/s 379 IPC, P.S. Manpura was registered on 22.03.2009. He intimated the opposite party about the theft and the claim was registered bearing No.2613007/31/2009/000500. He also completed the required formalities but the claim of the complainant has not been reimbursed and thus, there was deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party.

5                 However, as per the contention of the OP the vehicle in question was not insured with the opposite party w.e.f. 01.12.2008 to 30.11.2009 and thus, there was no insurable interest of the complainant in the vehicle in question and thus, there arises no question of any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party.

6                 After going through the facts and circumstances of the case and the evidence placed on file it is evident that the complainant was the registered owner of the vehicle in question. However, he has not produced any insurance policy in order to prove that the vehicle in question was insured with the opposite party at the time of theft. It is pertinent to mention here that the opposite party has taken a specific stand that the vehicle in question was not insured with the opposite party and as such onus was heavy upon the complainant to prove that the vehicle in question was insured with the opposite party but the complainant has failed to discharge the onus to prove that the vehicle was insured with the opposite party and in absence of any such evidence it cannot be held that the vehicle in question was insured with the opposite party and as such the vehicle was not insured with the OP and thus, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. Hence, the complaint has no merit and the same is hereby dismissed. The parties be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the records after due compliance.

Announced                                                                                                                                            (Subhash Goyal)

11.03.2016                                                                                                                                                        President,

                                                                                                                                                         District Consumer Disputes

                                                                                                                                                           Redressal Forum, Gurgaon

(Jyoti Siwach)        (Surender Singh Balyan)

Member                 Member