Delhi

Central Delhi

CC/307/2012

SH. NAVEEN - Complainant(s)

Versus

THA ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. - Opp.Party(s)

16 Jan 2015

ORDER

Heading1
Heading2
 
Complaint Case No. CC/307/2012
 
1. SH. NAVEEN
R/O 1995-A, NEAR LAMPUR ROAD TO SUMMAN OIL MILL RAILWAY ROAD, NARELA DELHI-40
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. THA ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.
4E/14, JHANDEWALAN ND 55
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. RAKESH KAPOOR PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.N SHUKLA MEMBER
 
For the Complainant:
For the Opp. Party:
ORDER

ORDER

Per Sh. Rakesh Kapoor, President

In the case of New India Insurance Company V/s Trilochan jane

Coming to the facts of the case in hand, it may be stated that the complainant is the registered owner of a vehicle  bearing registration number DL 11 S 7545 (Scooty).  He had purchased a policy of insurance in respect of the aforesaid vehicle for the period  2-6-2011 to 1-6-2012. It is the case of the complainant that the said vehicle had been stolen on 29-4-2012 and he had lodged an FIR in this regard on 28.4.2012 at Police Station Narela. The police could not trace out the vehicle and had sent an untraced report. The claim lodged by the complainant was repudiated on the plea that there was a violation of the terms and conditions of the policy of insurance. Hence, the complaint.

             The OP has contested the complaint t and has filed a written statement.

             It has denied any deficiency on its part and has claimed that the complaint is liable to be dismissed. It has justified its action of repudiation of the claim lodged by the complainant on the plea that the insured was guilty of violation of the terms and conditions of the policy of insurance.  It has stated that the insured was duty bound to inform it in writing about the loss immediately and not later than 48 hours.   It has stated that intimation about the loss was given to it after a delay of 46 days i.e. on 14-6-2012. It has ,therefore, prayed for the dismissal of the complaint.

            We have heard arguments advanced at the bar and have persued the record.

            Admittedly, the vehicle had taken place on 29/4/2012 and an FIR of the same was lodged on 30/4/2012. However, the insurance company was informed in writing about the loss only on 14/6/2012 by which time it had lost a valuable right to investigate the claim.     In view of the judgment cited by us above, we hold that the OP insurance company was justified in repudiating the claim of the  complainant.

We, therefore, see no merits in this complaint the same is hereby dismissed.

Copy of the order be made available to parties free of cost as per law.

          File be consigned to R/R.

        Announced in open sitting of the Forum on_____________

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. RAKESH KAPOOR]
PRESIDENT
 
[HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.N SHUKLA]
MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.