Haryana

StateCommission

A/1196/2017

CHOLAMANDALAM MS GEN.INSURANCE CO. - Complainant(s)

Versus

RAJPAL - Opp.Party(s)

RAJNEESH MALHOTRA

27 Aug 2018

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA, PANCHKULA

         

                                       

First Appeal No  :      1196 of 2017

Date of Institution:      09.10.2017

Date of Decision :      27.08.2018

 

1.      Cholamandlam MS General Insurance Company Limited, Delhi Road, near Jindal Chowk, Hisar, District Hisar through its Divisional Manager.

 

2.      Managing Director/General Manager, Cholamandlam MS General Insurance Company Limited, Registered and Head Office Dare House, 2^nd Floor, Floor No.2, NSC Bose Road, Chennai-600 001.

                             Appellants-Opposite Parties

 

Versus

 

Rajpal son of Sh. Dhoop Singh, resident of House No.865, Sir Chhotu Ram Colony, Hisar, District Hisar now residing at House No.417, Sector 16 & 17, near Civil Lines, Police Station, Hisar, District Hisar.

 

Respondent-Complainant

 

 

 

CORAM:             Hon’ble Mr. Justice Nawab Singh, President.

                             Shri Balbir Singh, Judicial Member.

 

                                                                                                                   

Argued by:          Shri Rajneesh Malhotra, Advocate for appellants.

                             Shri Pankaj Mehta, Advocate for respondent.

 

                                                   O R D E R

 

 

 

NAWAB SINGH J.(ORAL)

 

          Cholamandlam MS General Insurance Company Limited and its functionary-opposite parties (for short ‘Insurance Company’) are in appeal against the order dated June 22^nd, 2017 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Hisar (for short ‘District Forum’), whereby it directed the Insurance Company to pay Rs.3,06,000/- alongwith interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of the complaint, that is, December 04^th, 2015 till payment; Rs.3000/- harassment to Rajpal-complainant on account of theft of his Bolero Pick-up bearing registration No.HR-39B-6467 on May 13^th, 2015.

2.      The complainant got his vehicle insured from the Insurance Company for the period May 11^th, 2015 to May 10^th, 2016.  The Insured Declared Value of the vehicle was Rs.3,10,000/-.  The vehicle was stolen on the intervening night of May 12^th/13^th, 2015.  First Information Report No.381 was lodged on May 13^th, 2015.  The claim submitted by the Insurance Company was repudiated on the ground that the policy No.V0819248-FCV for the period from May 11^th, 2014 to May 10^th, 2015 was found to be fake. 

3.      The period of insurance was May 11^th, 2015 to May 10^th, 2016 and the policy was issued after complainant submitted the earlier policy bearing No.V0819248 purchased by him from Future Generali India Insurance Company Limited for the period May 11^th, 2014 to May 10^th, 2015. The Insurance Company by E-mail dated August 20^th, 2015 (Annexure-1) verified that the said policy (No.V0819248-FCV) was in the name of M/s B.R Enterprise and not in the name of Rajpal. Since, the earlier policy on the basis of which the present policy was issued, was found to be fake, so, the insurance company was not liable to indemnify the complainant.  Thus, the District Forum fell in error in allowing the complaint and as such the impugned order cannot be allowed to sustain. The appeal is accepted, the impugned order is set aside and the complaint is dismissed.

4.      The statutory amount of Rs.25,000/- deposited at the time of filing the appeal be refunded to the appellants against proper receipt and identification in accordance with rules, after the expiry of period of appeal/revision, if any.

 

 

Pronounced 27.08.2018

(Balbir Singh) Judicial Member

(Nawab Singh) President

UK