Haryana

Karnal

CC/177/2015

Rajan Sharma S/o Ashok Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

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

Dharmender Singh

10 Jan 2017

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM KARNAL.

                                                               Complaint No.177 of 2015

                                                             Date of instt.:04.08.2015

                                                              Date of decision:10.01.2017

 

Rajan Sharma son of Shri Ashok Kumar resident of House no.198, 8 Marla, Panipat.

 

                                                                   ……..Complainant.

                                      Vs.

1. Shri Ram General Insurance Company Limited, SCO no.410, First Floor, Mugal Canal, Karnal.

2. Shri Ram General Insurance Company Limited through its M.D./ Authorized Signatory, E-8, EPIP, RIICO, Sitapura, Jaipur (Rajasthan).

 

                                                                        ………… Opposite Parties.

 

                     Complaint u/s 12  of the Consumer Protection Act.

 

Before                   Sh.K.C.Sharma……….President.

                   Sh.Anil Sharma…….Member.

 

Present:-      Sh. Dharmender Singh Advocate for the complainant.

                    Sh. Vineet Rathore  Advocate for the Opposite parties.

                                     

 ORDER:

 

                        This complaint has been filed by the complainant u/s 12 of the Consumer protection Act 1986, on the averments that he got insured his motorcycle bearing registration no.HR-6T/6922 with the opposite party no.1, vide policy no.102081/31/13/001170 valid from 4.5.2012 to 3.5.2013. On 14.7.2012 he parked his motorcycle in front of Angle Mega Mall (HUDA) and went for shopping in the Mall. At about 5.30 p.m. when he came out of the Mall, he found his motorcycle stolen. He immediately reported the matter to the police on 100 number through his mobile no.9812800562, as well as the opposite party no.1. He searched for motorcycle at his own level, but could not trace out the same. He moved application to the police and on that basis First Information Report no.607 dated 22.07.2012 was registered in the Police Station Chandni Bagh, Panipat. He informed the insurance company on 11.1.2013. The authorized agent of the company met him and obtained the necessary documents and his signatures on some blank papers. He was assured that claim would be released within 30 days. All the required documents were submitted to the authorized agent of opposite party no.1 on 22.1.2013 and again on 31.1.2013. However, on 8.3.2013 he received letter dated 5.3.2013 regarding repudiation of his claim due to non-submission of the relevant documents despite the fact that he had submitted the relevant documents with the authorized agent of insurance company thrice. Such acts and conduct on the part of the opposite parties amounted to deficiency in service and gross negligence, which caused him mental pain, agony and harassment apart from financial loss.

2.                Notice of the complaint was given to the opposite parties, who put into appearance and filed written statement controverting the claim of the complainant. Objections have been raised that the complainant has no cause of action to file the complaint; that the complaint is bad for mis-joinder and non-joinder of necessary parties; that the complainant cannot take advantage of his own wrongs; that the complainant has not approached this Forum with clean hands; that this forum has no jurisdiction to entertain and try the present complaint and that the complaint is false and frivolous.

                   On merits, it has been submitted that the complainant failed to provide material and mandatory documents despite repeated requests, vide letters dated 28.01.2013, 17.01.2013 and 07.01.2013. Therefore, his claim was declared as ‘No Claim’. The claim was not processed further and kept pending subject to deposit of the said documents. Therefore, there was no cause of action to the complainant to file the present complaint. It has further been pleaded that the complainant had given belated intimation of the theft and he was extremely negligent and failed to exercise reasonable care and caution for security of the vehicle and thus violated the policy terms. The other allegations made in the complaint have been denied.

3.                In evidence of the complainant, his affidavit Ex.CW1/A and documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C6 have been tendered.

4.                On the other hand, in evidence of the opposite parties, affidavit of Arvind Sharma Ex.OP1/A and document  Ex.OP1 to Ex.OP10  have been tendered.

5.                We have appraised the evidence on record, the material circumstances of the case and the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties.

6.                The complainant got insured his motorcycle bearing registration no.HR-06T/6922 with the opposite party no.1 for the period of 4.5.2012 to 3.5.2013. The said motorcycle was stolen on 14.07.2012, during subsistence of the policy. As per the case of the complainant he informed the police on 100 number as well as opposite party no.1 immediately. He tried to search the motorcycle at his own level, but when he could not trace out the same he moved application to the police on 22.01.2012 and on the basis of the same First Information Report no.607 dated 22.07.2012 was registered in Police Station Chandni Bagh Panipat. It is further case of the complainant that he gave all the documents to the authorized agent of the insurance company thrice, but despite that his claim was repudiated due to non-submission of relevant documents.

7.                 A perusal of the letter dated 5.3.2013 issued by the opposite parties indicate that the claim of the complainant was closed as ‘No Claim’ because registered AD letters dated 17.1.2013 and 28.1.2013 were sent to him for sending required documents, but there was no response from his side. Even in the written statement it has been pleaded by the opposite parties that the claim of the complainant was not repudiated, but the same could not be processed as the complainant did not furnish the required documents despite letters sent to him, therefore, the claim was closed as ‘No Claim’.

8.                The opposite parties have produced the copies of the letters dated 28.1.2013, 17.1.2013 and 7.1.2013. According to the said letters, the complainant was requested to submit the documents mentioned therein. The letters were sent to the complainant through registered post. There is oral evidence of the complainant by way of his affidavit that the documents were submitted by him to the agent of the insurance company thrice. However, neither it has been pleaded nor there is an evidence of the complainant, which may show that he had responded to the aforesaid letters of the insurance company. The opposite parties are willing to process the claim of the complainant after submission of the required documents. As he did not submit the required documents, his claim could not be processed and as such he had no cause of action to file the complaint.

7.                In view of the aforediscussed facts and circumstances, we are of the opinion that the complaint is premature. Accordingly, the complainant is directed to submit the required documents  mentioned at serial nos. 1,2 and 5 to 9 in Ex.OP5, with the opposite parties within 30 days from the receipt of copy of this order and we further direct that the opposite parties would decide the claim of the complainant within 30 days of submission of the documents by the complainant. The complaint stands disposed off accordingly. The parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced

Dated: 10.01.2017

                                                                                      (K.C.Sharma)

                                                                                         President,

                                                                             District Consumer Disputes

                                                                             Redressal Forum, Karnal.

                             (Anil Sharma)

                               Member