This Complaint coming up before us for hearing on 09-04-2012 in the presence of Sri.G. Santha Kumar, advocate for complainant and of Sri.S.A.Khadar, advocate for opposite parties , upon perusing the material on record after hearing both sides and having stood over till this day for consideration this Forum made the following:-
O R D E R
Per Smt T. Suneetha, Member:-
The complainant filed this complaint u/s 12 of Consumer Protection Act seeking directions on the opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs.1,15,400/- towards insurance policy amount with an interest @ 24% p.a ,compensation and costs of the complaint.
2. In brief the averments of the complaint are hereunder:
The complainant is having an Auto No. AP07TU 8084, Engine No.BAMBPM23991, Chassis No. MD2AABAZZPWM45076. and it was insured with the opposite parties company under Policy No. 1803792339001796 valid from 25.03.2009 to 24.03.2010, which is issued in the name of the complainant by 1st opposite party through its branch office 2nd opposite party.
3. On 24.09.2009 at 11 A.M. the complainant parked his Auto No. AP07TU8084,EngineNo.BAMBPM23991,ChassisNo. MD2AABAZZPWM45076 in front of Naaz Apsara Theater, Naaz Centre, Kothapet, Guntur and went to watch movie. After completion of movie the complainant returned back and found that his parked auto was missing. He searched for his stolen auto at nearest places and thereafter entire city of Guntur. But he failed to trace it. Thereafter, on 01.03.2010 the complainant gave a report to Kothapet Crime P.S. who registered it as Cr.No.21/2010 u/s.379 of IPC and the same is in investigation. The complainant gave a letter dated 05.03.2010 to the opposite parties narrated the aforesaid story and requested them to pay compensation as per the terms of aforesaid policy. After receipt of the same, the 3rd opposite party asked the complainant to produce required documents. For that the complainant sent the required documents to the 3rd opposite party through courier “The Professional Couriers” on 20.05.2011. On receipt of the same, the opposite parties deputed Southern Claims Consultants, Hyderabad for verification of the details in connection with the stolen vehicle. The authorities of Southern Claims Consultants, Hyderabad verified the entire documents and case particulars and also obtained a letter dt.25.04.2011 from the complainant in which he explained about reasons for delay and submitted report to the opposite parties. The 3rd opposite party issued a letter dated 15.08.2010 informing the complainant that as there is abnormal delay of 78 days in giving claim intimation, they are not liable to pay any claim amount. The reasons shown by the opposite parties are not correct and they are all liable to pay compensation to the complainant under the policy. Hence the complaint.
4. The following is the version of 1st , 2nd and 3rd opposite
parties in brief as follows:
There is insurance coverage said auto bearing No.AP7TU 8084 in vide policy No. 1803792339001796 and said period of insurance commence from 25-03-2009 to 24-03-2010 and the said auto is hypothecated to Sri.Balaji Auto Finance, Guntur. The liability if any of this opposite party is subject to various terms, conditions, depreciation noted in the policy and its due compliance of the complainant.
5. The complainant has belatedly intimated the loss of insured vehicle i.e., on 12/03/2010 (Theft took place in the month of December, 2009 i.e., on 14/12/2009), i.e., after 2 and half months of the incident, the same is against to the terms and conditions of the policy, the relevant condition is reproduced herewith for kind perusal of this Hon’ble Authority;
“Notice shall be given in writing to the Company immediately upon the occurrence of any accidental loss or damage and in the vent of any claim and thereafter the insured shall give all such information and assistance as the Company shall require. Every letter claim writ summons and /or process or copy thereof shall be forwarded to the Company immediately on receipt by the insured. Notice shall also be given in writing to the Company immediately the insured shall have knowledge of any impending prosecution Inquest or Fatal Inquiry in respect of any occurrence which may give rise to a claim under this policy. In case of theft or criminal act which may be the subject of a claim under this policy the insured shall give immediate notice to the police and co-operate with the Company in securing the conviction of the offender”.
The Hon’ble National Commission has also held in the case of New India Assurance Co., Ltd., V/s. Trilochan jane as follows :
“Delay in reporting to the insurer about the theft of the car of 9 days, would be a violation of condition of the policy as it deprives the insurers of the valuable right to investigate as to the commission of the theft and to trace/help in tracing the vehicle”.
6. The theft occurred on 24-09-2009 and the complaint was given to the police on 01-03-2010.So there is delay of 5 months in giving FIR to the police.
7.The complainant did not file any documentary proof to show that he went to the movie and parked the vehicle in the parking area of the theatre and hence the complainant has foisted a story for the purpose of claiming compensation from this opposite party and hence on this ground the complaint is liable to be dismissed.
8. The complainant as well as the opposite parties filed their respective affidavits. Exs. A-1 to A-19 were marked on behalf of the complainant and Ex.B-1 & B-2 were marked on behalf of the opposite parties.
9. NOW THE POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION ARE :
1. Whether there is deficiency of service on the part of opposite
Parties?
2. To what relief the complainant is entitled to?
10. POINT NO: 1 & 2 :- The complainant lost his Auto on 24-09-2009. He gave police report on 01-03-2010 ( as per Ex.A-19 FIR) and intimated about the incident to the opposite party on 05-03-2010(as per Ex.A-4 and version of the opposite party).
11. The complainant delayed abnormally about 158 days in reporting the police and 162 days in intimating the opposite party which is against the requirement laid down in conditions No. 1 in the terms and conditions of the policy (Ex.B-1) which is as below :
Notice shall be given in writing to the Company immediately upon the occurrence of any accidental loss or damage and in the vent of any claim and thereafter the insured shall give all such information and assistance as the Company shall require. Every letter claim writ summons and /or process or copy thereof shall be forwarded to the Company immediately on receipt by the insured. Notice shall also be given in writing to the Company immediately the insured shall have knowledge of any impending prosecution Inquest or Fatal Inquiry in respect of any occurrence which may give rise to a claim under this policy. In case of theft or criminal act which may be the subject of a claim under this policy the insured shall give immediate notice to the police and co-operate with the Company in securing the conviction of the offender.
The Hon’ble National Commission held in the case of first appeal No.321/2005 of New India Assurance Co., Ltd., V/s. Trilochan jane as follows :
”……...... the respondent did not care to inform the insurance company about the theft for a period of 9 days, which could be fatal to the investigation. The delay in lodging the FIR after 2 days of the coming to know of the theft and 9 days to the insurance company, can be fatal as, in the meantime, the car could have traveled a long distance or may have been dismantled by that time and sold to Kabaadi (scrap dealer).” The appeal is dismissed in view of the above holding.
12. The complainant’s inordinate delay in giving report to police would not enable the opposite party to investigate the matter and ascertain the truth. It is the responsibility of the insured/complainant to inform the police as well as opposite party immediately about the theft of vehicle and initiate the process.
13. Under these circumstances, the Forum comes to a considered opinion that the Opposite parties repudiating complainant’s claim is just and proper and Opposite parties did not commit any deficiency of service.
14. In the result, the complaint is dismissed without costs.
Typed to my dictation by Junior Stenographer, corrected by us and pronounced in the open Forum dated this the, 13th day of April, 2012.
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
DOCUMENTS MARKED
For Complainant:
Ex.Nos. | DATE | DESCRIPTION OF DOCUMENTS |
A1 | 04-04-08 | Copy of Certificate of Registration of Auto No.AP07TU8084. |
A2 | 11-04-08 | Permit of Auto No.AP07TU 8084 |
A3 | - | Copy of Insurance Policy No.1803792339001796 |
A4 | 05-03-10 | Copy of Letter issued by complainant to opposite parties |
A5 | - | Copy of Letter of Subrogation |
A6 | - | Copy of Indemnity Bond |
A7 | - | Copy of Consent letter for claim settlement |
A8 | - | Copy of Form of certificate of No objection certificate and grant of certificate. Form – 28 |
A9 | - | Copy of Form of notice of transferer ownership of a motor vehicle. Form – 29 |
A10 | - | Copy of Report of transfer of ownership of a motor vehicle. Form – 30 |
A11 | - | Copy of verification letter of stolen vehicle by three witnesses. |
A12 | 18-05-10 | Copy of Letter of Sri.Balaji Auto Finance. |
A13 | 10-06-11 | Copy of Statement of Account of M/s. Balaji Auto Finance, Guntur issued by Bank of India. |
A14 | | Cheque No. 000001 of Bank of India, issued by Sri.Balaji Auto Finance. |
A15 | 20-05-11 | Copy of courier receipt of Professional courier. |
A16 | 25-04-11 | Copy of Letter issued by Southern Claims Consultants, Hyderabad. |
A17 | 25-04-11 | Copy of Check list of documents. |
A18 | 25-04-11 | Copy of letter issued by complainant to opposite party |
A19 | 01-03-2010 | Copy of first information report bearing No.21/2010 |
For Opposite Party:
Ex.Nos. | DATE | DESCRIPTION OF DOCUMENTS |
B1 | - | Copy of policy with terms and conditions. |
B2 | 15-08-10 | Copy of Repudiation letter |
PRESIDENT
