ORDER

04.07.2024

Sh. Sanjay Kumar, President

1. The factual matrix of the present case is that complainant is the registered owner of vehicle/car (Bolero Mahindra) bearing registration no.HR29Z-1529. It is stated that the complainant purchased the said car, for his personal/family i.e domestic use, from its the then owner namely Sh. Ram Pal R/o H. No.46, Adarsh Nagar, Ballabh Garh, Faridabad, Haryana, who had got duly insured the aforesaid car with the OP (through its agent/broker M/s Mahindra Insurance Brokers Ltd. Mahindra Show Room, Ballabh Garh Road, Faridabad, Haryana) vide insurance policy bearingno.0100603357 00 w.e.f 12.02.2012 to 11.02.2013.  It is further stated that the abovementioned factum of purchasing the aforesaid car was also communicated by the complainant to the concerned agent/branch office of OP and further acted as per their advice.
2. It is stated that on  the unfortunate date of 29.11.12 the aforesaid car of the complainant was stolen by some unknown persons. It is further stated that in consequences thereof, FIR bearing no.414/2012 u/s 379 IPC in the P.S Welcome (North East Distt., Delhi) was also registered against unknown persons. It is stated that the aforesaid unfortunate incident was also communicated forthwith to the OP and moreover copy of said FIR was also make available to it.
3. It is stated that the IO has filed untraced report in respect of the said FIR. It is further stated that the complainant has approached the OP on various occasions to claim the  insured amount in respect of the aforesaid car, but neither any satisfactory response was shown nor any appropriate action is taken till date in respect of the same, except of avoiding the  matter on one pretext to another related to some procedural difficulties.
4. It is stated that being aggrieved by above stated irresponsible and unwarranted attitude/acts of the OP, the complainant was constrained to serve legal notice dated 02.02.13 calling thereby the OP to grant/release the insurance claim to him, but it is very unfortunate to state that the OP avoided the matter on one pretext to another. It is further stated that complainant sent another legal notice/reminder dated 05.06.13 to OP which was also duly served upon it but till date no appropriate action is being taken.
5. The complainant is seeking direction against OP to pass decree for recovery of insurance claim of Rs.5,72,000/-, to pass decree of Rs.1,00,000/- for damages and compensation in favor of complainant for harassment, mental agony and economical loss suffered by complainant and any other order which deems fit and proper.
6. OP filed WS and taken preliminary objection that the present complaint is out rightly mischievous and frivolous, and completely undermining the due process of law and clauses of the insurance policy despite the fact that the insurance claim arises out of the contractual relationship entered between the insurer and the insured. It is further stated that the complainant has pleaded a false concocted story, the insurance policy no.010060335700 issued by the OP and its’ in the name of Mr. Rampal address H no.46, Adarsh Nagar, Ballabhgarh, Faridabad, 121002, Haryana and whereas the present complaint is filed by a stranger who does not own the insurance policy no.010060335700.
7. It is stated that complainant’ son alleged that he parked the vehicle bearing no. HR29Z 1592 make Mahindra and Mahindra ltd. insured by OP in A-40, Kubair Nagar, New Delhi at night and when he return back he found that vehicle was missing and subsequent to which he filed the complaint filed FIR bearing no.414/2012 in P.S Welcome  and later on investigation officer submitted the untraced report. This whole story was communicated via a legal notice by the counsel of complainant.
8. It is stated that complainant is deficient to claim any interest in the insurance policy. It is further stated that the complainant was bound to follow the due process of law for transferring the insurance policy as per the IMT (Indian Motor Tariff) GR17 and section 157 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988. It is further stated that as per GR17 of the Indian Motor Tariff the current owner was duty bound to get the policy transferred in his name after following the due process of law, however the current owner failed to do so due to which the current owner is not having any contract with the applicant therefore the applicant is in no manner liable to honor the present claim as the liability of applicant is strictly limited to the terms and condition of the insurance policy, which was in the name of Mr. Rampal.
9. It is stated that the complainant made no attempt to transfer the insurance policy, the complainant is at his own fault that he cannot have any say in the insurance policy. It is stated that it is settled that the apex court has in Complete Insulation Pvt Ltd Vs. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. (1996) 1 SCC 221, Rikhi Ram & Anr. Vs. Sukhrania & Ors. (2003) 3 scc 97, Madam Singh Vs. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. & Anr -1 (2009) CPJ 158 (NC).
10. On merit all the allegations made in the complaint are denied and contents of preliminary objections reiterated.
11. Complainant filed replication to the WS of OP and denied all the allegations made therein and reiterated contents of complaint.
12. Complainant filed evidence by way of his affidavit and reiterated contents of complaint. Complainant relied on photocopy of policy Annexure-1, copy of FIR and untraced report Annexure-2 and copy of legal notice dated 05.06.2013 and reminder Annexure-3.
13. As per  record no evidence filed  on record by OP.
14. As per record OP evidence was closed vide order dated 24.04.2018 as OP failed to file evidence despite several opportunities and also not paid the imposed cost of Rs.500/-.
15. Written arguments filed by complainant. As per record no written arguments filed by OP.
16. We have heard Ms. Akanshi counsel for complainant and Ms. Saloni proxy for Sh. Anuj Chauhan counsel for OP and perused the record.
17. It is admitted case of the parties that complainant is the registered owner of Bolero Mahindra having registration no. HR 29Z 1529. It is further admitted that complainant got issued insurance policy from OP having valid period from 12.02.2012 to 11.02.2013. It is further admitted case of the parties that on 29.11.2012 the car was stolen and an FIR bearing no.414/2012 under section 379 IPC was got registered at PS Welcome North East District Delhi. The police filed untraced report. According to OP the insurance policy no.010060335700 issued in the name of Mr. Rampal resident of H. No.46, Adarsh Nagar, Vallabhgarh, Faridabad, Haryana. The complainant filed documents on record i.e the RC of the car which shows the name of complainant Ram Ratan which is valid from 06.02.2011 to 11.02.2026. The insurance policy documents also shows that the insurance contract is in the name of Rampal and payment of the premium was also done by Mr. Rampal on 20.02.2012. The complainant has mentioned in the legal notice that he has purchased the car from Rampal, however, he has not filed any documentary proof of purchasing the car and also not specified the date and month and year of the purchase of the car.
18. It is pertinent to mention here that complainant has not filed any document to show that he has taken any steps for issuance of insurance policy in his name after purchase of the car. The photocopy of RC filed on record shows that he must have taken steps for change of ownership with concerned Motor Vehicle Authority. The OP specifically referred the GR 17 and Section 157 of Motor Vehicle Act which clearly cast duty on the purchaser to get insurance transfer after purchasing the car. The OP also referred to the judgment of Complete Insulation Pvt. Ltd. Vs. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. (1996) 1 SCC 2021, Rikhi Ram & Anr. Vs. V. Sukhrania & Ors. (2003) 3 SCC 1997 and Madam Singh Vs. United Insurance Co. Ltd. & Anr. 1 (2009) CPJ 158 (NC). We have gone through the all referred judgment. The present case is squarely covered by the principle of law laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court and Hon’ble National Commission. The complainant admittedly did not take any steps to get the transfer of insurance in his name after purchasing from Rampal, therefore, there is no liability of OP Insurance Co. to indemnify the loss.
19. On the basis of above observation and discussion present complaint is dismissed. No order as to cost. File be consigned to record room.
20. Copy of the order be given to the parties free of cost as per order dated 04.04.2022 of Hon’ble State Commission after receiving an application from the parties in the registry. The orders be uploaded on www.confonet.nic.in.

Announced in open Commission on  04.07.2024.

     SANJAY KUMAR                 NIPUR CHANDNA                       RAJESH

       PRESIDENT                             MEMBER                                MEMBER