BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SIRSA.
Consumer Complaint no. 164 of 2021
Date of Institution : 16.08.2021
Date of Decision : 29.07.2024
Lovepreet aged about 21 years son of Sh. Sukhdev Singh, resident of village Pohrakan, Tehsil Ellenabad, District Sirsa.
……Complainant.
Versus.
1. SBI General Insurance Company Limited Corporate and Registered Office Natraj 301, Junction of Western Express Highway & Andheri- Kurla Road, Andheri (East) Mumbai- 40069 through its Director.
2. SBI General Insurance SCO 149, Above SBI Mandi Branch Red Square Market, Hisar District Hisar through its Branch Manager.
…….Opposite Parties.
Complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
Before: SH. PADAM SINGH THAKUR……. PRESIDENT
MRS.SUKHDEEP KAUR……………MEMBER.
SH. OM PARKASH TUTEJA………..MEMBER
Present: Sh. Kapil Dev, Advocate for the complainant.
Sh. H. S. Raghav, Advocate for opposite parties.
ORDER
The complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the opposite parties (hereinafter referred as Ops).
2. In brief, the case of complainant is that complainant purchased the tractor bearing registration No. HR44L- 6968 make Sonalika DI 750 for Rs.7,20,000/- from Sonalika Agency Shree Tractors of Ellenabad on 08.10.2020 vide invoice no. 477 dated 08.10.2020. The complainant paid Rs.1,70,000/- in cash and remaining amount was financed from L&T Finance Service and got insured his vehicle from ops vide policy no. P05081020152802 w.e.f. 08.10.2020 to 07.10.2021. It is further averred that on 01.03.2021 the complainant parked his above said tractor near Rest House at Ellenabad and gone for his work and when he returned back there, the tractor was not there and he searched his vehicle but same could not be traced. The complainant got registered FIR bearing No. 73 dated 05.03.2021 under Section 379 IPC against unknown person in Police Station Ellenabad but vehicle could not be traced till date. It is further averred that complainant approached to the ops for indemnification his claim but on all the occasions the ops asked the complainant to keep waiting and stated that process of claim take some time and now the ops denied to make payment of his claim by saying that there is delay of 65 days in lodging the FIR which is false and baseless excuse and as such ops have caused unnecessary harassment, unfair trade practice, deficiency in service and mental agony to the complainant because vehicle was on finance and he has no source of income to pay the amount to finance company. The complainant further approached the ops and requested them to compensate him but ops about a week ago flatly refused to admit the genuine claim of complainant. Hence, this complaint.
3. On notice, ops appeared and filed written statement raising certain preliminary objections. It is submitted that complainant has concealed the true and material facts from the ops and from this Commission. The complainant gave his tractor on rent basis to Mr. Nanu Ram (herein after referred as culprit) as per agreement and same was executed between complainant and culprit on dated 30.12.2020. This is a violation of the terms and conditions of the insurance policy. It is further submitted that a false and fabricated story has been put forward by complainant only to grab money from ops and has also misled the Commission. As per facts of case complainant given his tractor on rent basis to culprit from 30.12.2020 to 28.02.2021 as per agreement and same was executed on stamp paper of Rs.50/- between complainant and culprit on 30.12.2020. Thereafter on next day when he reached the culprit village Kanewala for verification of purpose then he found culprit is fraud type person. Thereafter complainant given an application for lodging FIR against culprit and tracing out his tractor to P.S. Goluwala, District Hanumangarh (Rajasthan). It is further submitted that on 23.01.2021 complainant given legal notice to culprit through his counsel from Ellenabad and after delay of about 65 days complainant lodged one another FIR dated 05.03.2021 on manipulated and fabricated facts against unknown person under Section 379 IPC in Police Station Ellenabad, District Sirsa. As per statement/ application of complainant dated 25.03.2021 which was given to insurance company, he received rent in advance amounting to Rs.70,000/- and surrendered his tractor with one original key, registration certificate and insurance policy to culprit. It is further submitted that as per above facts, complainant himself played fraud with insurance company only to grab money and this is a violation of the terms and conditions of insurance policy, hence op insurance company has rightly repudiated the claim on 13.07.2021. It is also submitted that this Commission has no jurisdiction to try and entertain the present complaint because first of its occurrence arises out at village Kanewala situated in District Hanumangarh (Rajasthan) and this important fact and also other facts concealed by complainant. Remaining contents of complaint are also denied to be wrong and prayer for dismissal of complaint made.
4. The complainant in evidence has tendered his affidavit Ex. CW1/A and documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C4.
5. On the other hand, ops have tendered affidavit of Sh. Jitendra Dhabhai, Legal Manager as Ex. RW1/A and documents Ex.R1 to Ex.R17.
6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the case file.
7. Although complainant has alleged that on 01.03.2021 his insured tractor bearing registration No. HR-44L-6968 was stolen by some unknown person in the area of Ellenabad and in this regard complainant has also relied upon copy of FIR dated 05.03.2021 recorded in Police Station Ellenabad under Section 379 IPC against unknown person as Ex.C3 but the record produced by ops i.e. copy of agreement Ex.R9 executed between Lovepreet present complainant and one Nanu Ram son of Chet Ram, resident of village T.K. W. Gram Panchayat Kanhewala, Tehsil Pili Banga, District Hanumangarh (Rajasthan) reveals that complainant himself entered with an agreement with said Nanu Ram whereby the tractor in question bearing registration No. HR44L6968 was given by complainant himself to Nanu Ram on 30.12.2020 i.e. much before the alleged date of theft i.e. 01.03.2021 i.e. about two months ago before alleged date of theft on rent basis for two months at the rate of Rs.35,000/- per month and the tractor was to be received back by complainant from said Nanu Ram on 28.02.2021. It is also proved on record that when said Nanu Ram did not pay any amount of rent to the complainant, therefore, on 23.01.2021 complainant sent a legal notice to said Nanu Ram through his counsel Sh. Jagtar Singh Randhwa, Advocate of Ellenabad whereby said Nanu Ram was asked to hand over the tractor and also to give two months rent of the tractor to the complainant and said copy of legal notice is also placed on file by ops as Ex.R13. The ops also got investigated the matter from its Investigator who recorded the statement of owner of tractor as Ex.R8 in which the complainant admitted the real facts that actually tractor was given by him on rent to Nanu Ram on 30.12.2020 and now said Nanu Ram has fled away alongwith his tractor and that he has moved an application against Nanu Ram in Police Station Guluwala, Hanumangarh but they did not register any case against Nanu Ram and thereafter as per advise of officials of that police station they came to Police Station Ellenabad and the police officials of that police station registered FIR in their own way which is bearing No. 0073 dated 05.03.2021. In the said FIR No. 73 dated 05.03.2021, said Nanu Ram has not been made culprit rather same has been registered against some unknown person despite the fact that on 05.01.2021 i.e. about two months ago before 01.03.2021 the complainant moved an application against said Nanu Ram in Police Station Ellenabad. So, it is proved on record that as per their agreement, complainant handed over the tractor to said Nanu Ram on rent basis for two months at the rate of Rs.35,000/- per month and he has also admitted that after two months when tractor was not returned to him by said Nanu Ram he inquired the mater and came to know that Nanu Ram is not a credible person and thereafter he reported the matter to Rajasthan Police but they did not take any action. The complainant not tried to get lodged any FIR against said Nanu Ram through any Court of Law or through higher police authorities of Rajasthan State under the provision of law. Since the tractor in question was handed over by complainant himself to Nanu Ram and Nanu Ram has not returned the tractor to complainant, so story of theft is falsified by plea and evidence led by ops. Further more, as complainant was having knowledge that he himself has handed over his tractor to said Nanu Ram, thus above said FIR registered in Police Station Ellenabad has been lodged by the police in connivance with the complainant in order to get claim from insurance company, therefore, present complaint is not maintainable in the present form against the insurance company for theft of his tractor which is falsified. So, it is proved on record that complainant himself given his tractor to Nanu Ram on rent basis and when he did not return the tractor and did not give any rent to the complainant, the complainant has come with false and frivolous claim against insurance company with false allegations that on 01.03.2021 the complainant parked his above said tractor near the rest house at Ellenabad and gone for his work and when he returned back, the tractor was not there. The complainant has not rebutted the plea of ops taken in their written version as well as their evidence by filing any counter affidavit of himself or of Sh. Jagtar Singh, Advocate to falsify the version of ops that they did not send any legal notice to Nanu Ram. Since the complainant himself handed over his tractor to Nanu Ram who has fled away with his tractor, as such complainant is not entitled to any claim from the ops as he has come with false allegations and at the most he can initiate criminal proceedings against said Nanu Ram for recovery of his tractor as well as rent under the law.
8. In view of our above discussion, we do not find any merit in the present complaint and same is hereby dismissed but with no order as to costs. A copy of this order be supplied to the parties as per rules. File be consigned to the record room.
Announced. Member Member President,
Dated: 29.07.2024. District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Sirsa.
