RESERVED
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
UTTAR PRADESH, LUCKNOW
APPEAL NO. 1186 OF 2017
(Against the judgment/order dated 09-03-2017 in Complaint Case
No.153/2016 of the District Consumer Forum, Mainpuri)
ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd.
Through the Manager Legal Office at 4th Floor
Corporate Chambers-II, Vibhuti Khand,
Gomti Nagar, Lucknow.
Interalia Corporate Office at Zenith House
Keshav Rao Bade Marg, Mahalaxmi
Mumbai
...Appellant
Vs.
Raghuveer Medical Agency
Through Proprietor Mr. Rajeev Bhatnagar
S/o Late Rajbahadur Bhatnagar
At Raghuveer Sheetgrih
Radharaman Road, Laneganj
Mainpuri
...Respondent
BEFORE:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AKHTER HUSAIN KHAN, PRESIDENT
For the Appellant : Sri Brijendra Chaudhary, Advocate.
For the Respondent : Sri Akhilesh Trivedi, Advocate.
Dated : 20-12-2018
JUDGMENT
PER MR. JUSTICE A. H. KHAN, PRESIDENT
This is an appeal filed before State Commission under Section-15 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 against the judgment and order dated 09-03-2017 passed by District Consumer Forum, Mainpuri in Complaint Case No. 153/2016, Raghuveer Medical Agency V/s ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Limited and another whereby the District Consumer Forum has allowed complaint partially and passed order in Hindi which is extracted below.
‘’परिवादी का परिवाद आंशिक रूप से स्वीकार किया जाता है तथा विपक्षीगण को निर्देश दिया जाता है कि वह परिवादी को एक माह के अंदर
:2:
मोटर साईकिल की बीमित धनराशि रू0 28,720/- को अदा करें तथा उक्त धनराशि पर परिवाद दायर करने की तिथि 22-08-2016 से 09 प्रतिशत वार्षिक ब्याज भी अदा करे।
विपक्षीगण को यह भी आदेश दिया जाता है कि वह परिवादी को मानसिक कष्ट के मद में रू0 5000/- व वाद व्यय के मद में रू0 3000/- भी अदा करें।‘’
Feeling aggrieved by the above order passed by District Consumer Forum, opposite parties of complaint have filed this appeal.
Learned Counsel Sri Brijendra Chaudhary appeared for appellants.
Learned Counsel Sri Akhilesh Trivedi appeared for respondent.
I have heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused impugned judgment and order as well as records.
In brief relevant facts for determination of appeal are that the respondent/complainant has filed above complaint before District Consumer Forum against appellants/opposite parties ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Limited, Lucknow and ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Limited, Mumbai for redressal of its grievance arising out of insurance claim of its motorcycle stolen on 26-05-2015 No.U.P. 84L/5444 stolen on 26-05-2015.
It has been contended by respondent/complainant in complaint that he has furnished all papers and completed all formalities. Even then the appellant Insurance Company has refused to pay insured amount to it.
The appellants/opposite parties have filed written statement before District Consumer Forum wherein it has been stated that the FIR of alleged incident of theft has been lodged in P.S. Mainpuri after 92 days of occurrence and delayed intimation to Insurance Company has been given. As such the respondent/complainant has violated condition of insurance policy. Therefore the appellant Insurance Company has rightly repudiated claim of respondent/complainant.
After having gone through pleadings of parties as well as evidence on record the District Consumer Forum has held that the complainant has proved that information to police as well as to the Insurance Company has
:3:
been given on the day of occurrence of theft. The Insurance Company has wrongly repudiated claim of respondent/complainant. Therefore, the District Consumer Forum has allowed complaint partially and passed order as extracted above.
During course of argument both parties admitted that the respondent/complainant has given written information to the Officer Incharge, Police Station Kotwali Mainpuri on 26-05-2015 on the date of occurrence of alleged theft of motorcycle in question. Photocopy of first information report dated 26-05-2015 allegedly given by respondent/complainant to Officer Incharge, Police Station Kotwali Mainpuri is at page 25 of appeal.
After having gone through evidence on record I am of the view that the District Consumer Forum has rightly recorded finding to the effect that information to police as well as to Insurance Company has been given on the day of occurrence. As such I am of the view that the District Consumer Forum has rightly allowed complaint partially and ordered opposite parties to pay insured amount of vehicle Rs.28,720/- but it appears that interest awarded by District Consumer Forum at the rate of 9% per annum is on higher side. It should be reduced to 6% per annum.
In view of above appeal is allowed partially. Impugned judgment and order passed by District Consumer Forum is modified and the rate of interest 9% per annum is reduced to 6% per annum. Remaining part of impugned judgment and order shall remain intact.
In appeal both parties shall bear their own costs.
Rs.25,000/- deposited by appellants under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 in this appeal shall be remitted to District Consumer Forum for disposal in accordance with this judgment.
Let copy of this order be made available to the parties positively within 15 days as per rules.
( JUSTICE A H KHAN )
PRESIDENT
Pnt.
