CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM – X

GOVERNMENT OF N.C.T. OF DELHI

Udyog Sadan, C – 22 & 23, Institutional Area

(Behind Qutub Hotel)

New Delhi – 110 016

Case No.633/2010

SH. BHOODEV SINGH

S/O SH. MALKHAN SINGH

R/O C-94, PREM NAGAR,

NAJAFGARH,

DELHI-110043

…………. COMPLAINANT                                                                                     

                                    VS.

M/S RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.

MS PRIYANKA BAKSHI, OFFICER IN CHARGE

OFFICE AT: 60, OKHLA INDUSTRIAL ESTATE,

PHASE-III, NEW DELHI-110020

      …………..RESPONDENT

Date of Order: 05.04.2016

O R D E R

A.S. Yadav – President

The case of the complainant is that he got his vehicle No.DL-1VB-3542 insured with OP for the period 17.01.2009 to mid night of 16.01.2010 vide cover note No.108000836308 for insured value of Rs.3,40,000/-.

It is stated that Mr. Vikram Singh, agent of OP-1 insisted on payment of the premium amount in cash instead of cheque.  Accordingly the premium amount was paid in cash by Mr. Ashok employee of complainant.  The said amount of Rs.11,462/- was handed over to Mr. Ashok vide voucher dated 16.01.2009 . 

It is stated that on 28.07.2009 the car was stolen from outside the residence of the complainant’s driver and the matter was immediately reported to police vide FIR no.336/09 PS Mandawali, East Delhi District u/s 379 IPC.  The matter was brought to the notice of OP.  OP appointed investigator and all the information required by investigator were submitted but till date the claim has not been settled by OP despite legal notice.  It is stated to be clear cut case of deficiency in service on the part of OP.

OP in the reply took the plea that the premium amount of Rs.12,879/- was paid by cheque bearing No.085606 dated 16.01.2009 drawn on SBI.  It is submitted that the cheque on presentation was dishonoured on 20.01.2009.  It is also mentioned on the cover note itself “in the event of dishonour of cheque(s) insurance cover provided under this document automatically stands cancelled from its inception ……..”.  Hence due to the non compliance of the requirement of section 64 VB of Insurance Act, 1938 there was no valid insurance as on the date of theft. 

It is submitted that it has never been and cannot be company policy to insist for cash only for commercial vehicle or for any kind of vehicle.  It is stated that the alleged cash voucher in favour of Ashok, employee of complainant is a fabricated document. 

We have hard Ld. Counsel for complainant and carefully perused the record.

The only contention of Ld. Counsel of complainant is that the premium amount was paid in cash by Sh. Ashok to Mr. Vikram Singh and who after accepting the cash issued the cover note.  In fact complainant has concealed the material fact.  The premium was paid by way of cheque bearing No.085606 dated 16.01.2009.  It is nowhere stated in the rejoinder that complainant never issued this cheque or that complainant was not having account in SBI and the cheque did not pertain to him.  It is categorically mentioned in cover note by complainant himself that the premium received by way of cheque.  The details of the cheque are mentioned in the cover note.  The cover note is placed on record by complainant himself.  Complainant is very well aware of the fact that premium amount has been paid by cheque.  There is no question of receiving the amount in cash.  The so called payment voucher is a self-created document in order to create a false story.  It is mentioned in the cover note itself that “in the event of dishonour of cheque insurance cover provided under this document automatically stands cancelled from its inception, irrespective of the fact whether separate communication sent or not, the cover note comes to an end on the dishonour of the cheque.  Insurance contract has never come into existence.  The contention of Ld. Counsel for complainant is that till filing of the complaint OP has not repudiated the claim of complainant and has not served any notice on complainant regarding dishonour of the cheque.

We have already discussed that on the cover note it is specifically mentioned that the policy automatically comes to an end on the dishonour of the cheque irrespective of the fact whether communication sent or not.

There was no deficiency in service on the part of OP.  Hence the complaint is dismissed.

            Copy of order be sent to the parties, free of cost, and thereafter file be consigned to record room.

             (D.R. TAMTA)                                                         (A.S. YADAV)

                 MEMBER                                                               PRESIDENT