Punjab

Sangrur

CC/551/2017

GD Jewelles - Complainant(s)

Versus

SBI General Insurance Company Limited - Opp.Party(s)

Sh.Sumir Fatta

02 Apr 2018

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SANGRUR.

                                                               

                                                Complaint No.  551

                                                Instituted on:    16.10.2017

                                                Decided on:       02.04.2018

 

GD Jewelles, Qila Market, Sangrur through its Prop. Aman Goyal son of Hukam Chand.

                                                        …Complainant

                                Versus

1.             SBI General Insurance Company Limited, 7B, Ground Floor, Rejendra Park, Pusa Road, New Delhi, through its Regional Manager.

2.             SBI General Insurance Company Limited, 2^nd Floor, SCB-7, Chotti Baradari, Patiala through its Branch Manager.

3.             SBI General Insurance Company Limited, Opp. Banasar  Bagh, Sangrur through its Branch Manager.

4.             State Bank of India, Branch Sangrur through its Branch Manager, Patiala Gate, Sangrur.

                                                        ..Opposite parties.

For the complainant  :       Shri Sumir Fatta, Adv.

For Opp.Party No.1to3:    Shri Vinay Jindal, Adv.

For OP No.4             :       Shri Anil Aggarwal, Adv.

 

 

Quorum:   Sukhpal Singh Gill, President

                Sarita Garg, Member

               

Order by : Sukhpal Singh Gill, President.

 

1.             Shri Aman Goyal Prop. GD Jewelles, complainant (referred to as complainant in short) has preferred the present complaint against the opposite parties (referred to as OPs in short) on the ground that the complainant is running the said shop to earn his livelihood by way of self employment. Further case of the complainant is that he obtained a loan of Rs.10,00,000/- from OP number 4 for installation of universal faceting and milling/machine along with all its  components in the year 2015 and, as such, the same was got insured from the OPs number 1 to 3 in order to cover the risk of the loan and subsequently the insurance policy was got renewed from time to time and lastly it was renewed on 31.8.2016 by paying the premium of Rs.1927/- and the policy value was Rs.6,70,000/-.  The grievance of the complainant is that on 7.4.2017 he along with his family members went to attend a jagran and the said machine was lost from his house, of which DDR number 16 dated 11.4.2017 was lodged at PS City Sangrur and intimation of the same was also given to the OPs.  After getting the intimation, the OPs appointed surveyor i.e. M/s. Mittal Independent Insurance Surveyor and Loss Assessors and the complainant submitted all the required documents to them for settlement of the complainant, but the case of the complainant is that the OP number 1 repudiated the claim of the complainant vide letter dated 30.5.2017 on the ground that “theft of the machine happened outside your shop while the machine was lying at your house” and the policy does not cover the risk location of your house.  Further the complainant has alleged that the OPs have wrongly repudiated the claim on flimsy grounds.  Thus, alleging deficiency in service on the part of the OPs, the complainant has prayed that the Ops be directed to pay to the complainant the amount of Rs.6,70,000/- along with interest @ 9% per annum and further claimed compensation and litigation expenses.

 

2.             In reply filed by OP number 1 to 3, legal objections are taken up on the grounds that this Forum has got no territorial jurisdiction to try and decide the present complaint, that the Ops have no branch office at Sangrur, that the complainant first lodged the DDR by showing place of loss of machine at his house and even submitted claim form to this effect and lodged DDR number 18 dated 11.4.2017 and subsequently got lodged another DDR number 29 dated 13.4.2017 showing the location of the loss as his shop, that as per the report of the surveyor the theft took place outside the insured premises and the house of the complainant is located at a distance of 2 KMs from the shop of the complainant, that the complainant did not submit the requisite documents and that intricate questions of law and facts are involved in the present complaint.  On merits, it is admitted that the machine in question was insured with the OPs. However, the insurance was strictly subject to the risk location, amount of insurance and terms and conditions mentioned therein and the risk location under the policy was clearly mentioned as Qila Market Sangrur, whereas the theft took place at the house of the complainant, as such, it is stated that the claim has rightly been repudiated by the Ops vide letter dated 26.5.2017. The other allegations levelled in the complaint have been denied in toto.

 

3.             In reply filed by OP number 4,  it is admitted that the complainant had taken the loan of Rs.10,00,000/- from the OPs for purchase of machine for making ornaments in the year 2015 and the said machine was got insured from OPs number 1 to 3 subject to the terms and conditions of the policy.  The other allegations levelled in the complaint have been denied in toto.

 

4.             The learned counsel for the complainant has produced Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-5 copies of documents and affidavit and closed evidence. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the OP number 1 to 3 has produced Ex.OP1to3/1 to Ex.OP1to3/5 copies of documents and closed evidence. The learned counsel for OP number 4 has produced Ex.OP4/1 affidavit and closed evidence.

 

5.             We have carefully perused the complaint, version of the opposite parties and evidence produced on the file and also heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties. In our opinion, the complaint merits dismissal, for these reasons.

 

6.             At the outset, it is an admitted fact of the complainant as well as the OPs number 1 to 3 that the complainant availed the services of the OPs by getting insured his universal machine in question under the policy for the period from 7.8.2016 to 6.8.2017 and during the subsistence of the insurance period the machine in question was lost/stolen from the house of the complainant on 7.4.2017.  It is also not in dispute that the complainant got lodged DDR number 016 dated 11.4.2017 with the police regarding theft of the machine in question from his house on 7.4.2017, as is evident from the coy of DDR dated 11.4.2017, which is on record as Ex.C-4.  It is also not in dispute that the complainant lodged another DDR number 029 dated 13.04.2017 with an intention to get the claim on the ground that the machine in question was stolen at his shop.  Thus, it is clear that the machine in question was stolen from the house of the complainant as mentioned in the DDR dated 11.4.2017 and the complainant lodged another DDR on 13.4.2017 only with an intention to get the insurance claim, as he had full knowledge that the claim is not payable if the machine in question is lost/stolen at his residence, which is admittedly about two kilometre from the shop of the complainant.   It is worth mentioning here that the address of the insured premises is Qila Market, Sangrur and not the residence of the complainant.  In the circumstances, we feel that there is nothing wrong on the part of the OPs number 1 to 3 in repudiating the claim of the complainant, as the complainant has withheld the true and material facts from the OPs as well as from this Forum.   

 

7.             In view of our above discussion, we find no merit in the complaint and as such, we dismiss the complaint of the complainant. However, the parties are left to bear their own costs. A copy of this order be issued to the parties free of cost. File be consigned to records.

                        Pronounced.

                        April 2, 2018.

                                                        (Sukhpal Singh Gill)

                                                                President

 

                                                             

                                       

                                                                (Sarita Garg)

                                                                    Member