Haryana

Kurukshetra

CC/70/2019

Rajinder Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Oriental Insurance Compnay - Opp.Party(s)

Suresh Kajal

16 Mar 2021

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KURUKSHETRA.

 

  Consumer Complaint No.70  of  of 2019.

                                                                           Date of Instt.:22.02.2019

  Date of Decision:16.03.2021

 

Rajinder Singh son of Sh.Mehar Singh resident of village Kheri-Dab-Dalan, Tehsil Ladwa, District Kurukshetra

                                                                                      …….Complainant.                                                       Versus

 

The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Sabharwal Market, Railway Road, Kurukshetra through its Branch .Manager.

          ….…Opposite party.

 

             Complaint under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act.

 

Before        Smt. Neelam Kashyap, President.    

                   Ms. Neelam, Member. 

                   Shri Issam Singh Sagwal, Member.                     

                   

Present:      Sh.Suresh Kajal, Advocate for the complainant.    

Sh.Gaurav Gupta Advocate for the Opposite Party.

ORDER

 

                   This is a complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 moved by the complainant Rajinder Singh against Oriental Insurance Company Limited- the opposite party.

 

2.                The brief facts of the complaint are that the complainant was the registered owner of  car bearing registration No. HR-02W-0026 and the said vehicle was insured with the OP vide insurance policy No.261303/31/2018 valid from 03.03.3018 to 02.03.2019.  It is averred that the said car of the complainant was stolen therefore, FIR No.067 dated 21.06.2018 u/s 379 IPC was registered  in Police Station Phase-8, Mohali. The complainant informed the OP and also submitted all the documents required in this regard apart from  both the keys of the vehicle as per requirement of the OP, but the claim of the complainant has not been paid till date.  The complainant visited the OP several times and requested to pay the claim but nothing has been done which amounts to deficiency in services on the part of the  OP. Thus, the complainant has filed the present complaint alleging deficiency in services on the part of the  OP and prayed that the OPs be directed to  pay the claim of Rs.3,64,500/- alongwith compensation for the mental harassment caused to him and the litigation expenses.

 

2.                Upon notice, OP appeared and filed its written statement disputing the claim of the complainant.  It is submitted that insurance policy of the complainant was subject to certain terms and conditions.  It is submitted that on receipt of the intimation regarding theft of  the car, OP immediately appointed investigator namely Unique Associates to investigate the matter and to collect the requisite documents. During investigation, said investigator met the complainant and requested to provide the requisite documents. When despite repeated requests and visits, complainant had not provided the same, perforce investigator sent letter dated 2.08.2018 to complainant for providing the said documents but when the complainant failed to submit documents, he submitted his report without documents. Thereafter, the  OP  sent letter dated 12.2.2019 to the complainant to provide the  7 requisitioned documents as mentioned

i)       NCRB report.

ii)       Untraceable report through court.

iii)      Copy of vehicle purchase invoice.

iv)      Proof of existence of vehicle with insured before theft.

v)      Difference in name of driver in information and claim form? Kindly clarify.

vi)      FIR was not lodged by insured himself? Kindly verify.

vii)     Submit the copy of DL of Sh.Randeep Singh.

 but till date  the complainant has failed to submit the documents and the claim of the complainant could not be processed and the present complaint is pre-mature and  has prayed for dismissal of the present complaint.

 

3.                The complainant in support of his  case has filed his affidavit Ex.CW1/A and tendered  documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-6 and closed his evidence.

 

4.                On the other hand, OP in support of its case has filed affidavit Ex.RW1/A and tendered documents Ex.R-1 to Ex.R-9 and closed his evidence.

5.                We have heard the learned counsel for  both the parties and  have gone through the material available on the case file.

7.                The learned counsel for the complainant has argued that car  bearing registration No. HR-02W-0026, was got insured with the OP vide insurance policy No. 261303/31/2018 for the period from 3.3.2018 to 2.03.2019.  It is argued that the said car  of the complainant was stolen and accordingly he got registered FIR  No.067  u/s 379 IPC in Police Station Phase-8, Mohali. The complainant intimated about the theft of the said car  to the OP and submitted all the relevant papers  apart from both the keys of the vehicle but despite that the claim of the complainant has been closed by the OP as “No Claim” which is deficiency in services on the part of the OP.

 

8.                On the other hand, learned counsel for the OP while reiterating the contentions made in the written statement has argued that on receipt of the intimation regarding theft of the vehicle, OP immediately appointed investigator namely Unique Associates to investigate the matter and to collect the requisite documents. During investigation, said investigator met the complainant and requested to provide the requisite documents. When despite requests and visits, complainant had not provided the same, perforce investigator sent letter dated 2.08.2018 to complainant to provide the documents, but the coplaiannt failed to provide the same. Therefore, the claim of the complainant could not be processed and the present complaint is pre mature. Therefore, there is no deficiency in services on the part of the OP.

 

9.                After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, we are of the view that the claim of the complainant has wrongly been denied by the OPs. The OPs have failed to place on record copies of the alleged reminders as argued by the OP.  From the perusal of copy of the insurance policy Ex.C-1 it is established that the vehicle in question was insured with the OP on the date of theft. From the copy of report u/s 173 Cr.P.C. Ex.C-2, it is also established that the said vehicle of the complainant was stolen on 20.06.2018. Vide Ex.R-1, the complainant informed the OP about the loss of vehicle and filed claim form Ex.R-2. In the investigation report Ex.R-3,  loss of vehicle has been admitted by the investigator. So far as providing of documents is concerned, all the documents are on the file but the OPs have not dared to settle the claim even during the pendency of the present and as such there is deficiency in services on the part of the OPs in not giving the claim of the complainant.  Therefore, the complainant is entitled to sum assured i.e. Rs.3,64,500/- from the OP alongwith interest @ 6% per annum together with compensation for the mental harassment and agony caused to him and the litigation expenses.

 

10.              As a result of our above discussion, we accept the present complaint and direct the OP to make the payment of Rs.3,64,500/- i.e. sum assured, to the complainant alongwith interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the present complaint i.e. 22.02.2019 till its actual realization. The complainant shall also be entitled for a sum of Rs. 5000/- as compensation for the mental harassment and agony caused to him together with a sum of Rs.5000/- as litigation  expenses. The OP  is   further directed to make the compliance of this order within a  period of  45 days from the date of preparation of certified copy of this order, failing which, the complainant will be at liberty to initiate proceedings under Section 25/27 of the Act against the OPs. Certified copy of this order be supplied to the parties concerned, forthwith, free of cost as permissible under Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the record-room, after due compliance.

 

Announced in open commission:

Dt.: 16.03.2021                                                                  (Neelam Kashyap)

                                                                                                President.

 

 

(Issam Singh Sagwal),              (Neelam)         

 Member                                     Member.