BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES
REDRESSAL FORUM, JALANDHAR.
Complaint No.329 of 2015
Date of Instt. 06.08.2015
Date of Decision : 21.07.2016
Enamul Haq son of Azizzul Haq, resident of earlier 8 Manjit Nagar, Basti Guzan, Jalandhar City and presently resident of 40, New Dilbagh Nagar, Jalandhar-144002.
..........Complainant
Versus
1.The Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Limited, SCO-14, 4th Floor, Urban Estate, Sector-5, Panchkulla, through its Manager Motor Claims.
2.The Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Limited, 2nd Floor, Satnam Complex, BMC Chowk, GT Road, Jalandhar through its Manager.
.........Opposite parties
Complaint Under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.
Before: S. Bhupinder Singh (President)
Sh.Parminder Sharma (Member)
Present: Sh.KL Dua Adv., counsel for the complainant.
Sh.Raman Sharma Adv., counsel for the OPs.
Order
Bhupinder Singh (President)
1. The complainant has filed the present complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act against the opposite parties (hereinafter called as OPs) on the averments that complainant got his motorcycle Spendour bearing registration No.PB-08-CE-1453 insured with the OP for the period from 24.9.2014 to 23.9.2015. Complainant submitted that on 13.4.2014 at about 11.00 AM, complainant visited the premises of M/s Gold Man Shutter, Model House, Jalandhar City. He parked his motorcycle in front of the shop and went into the shop. Complainant while talking about the work took few steps ahead in the shop. The complainant when came out from the shop, he was stunned to note that motorcycle of the complainant was not there where it was parked and was stolen by some unknown person. Complainant tried his best to find out his motorcycle but in vain. The matter was reported to the police, on the basis of which FIR No.78 dated 16.4.2015 was registered at PS Bhargo Camp, Jalandhar under section 379 of IPC. The matter was also reported to the OP and the claim was lodged with the OP alongwith relevant documents. However, the OP repudiated the claim of the complainant vide letter dated 11.5.2015. On such averments, the complainant has prayed for directing the OPs to pay the claim amount of the motorcycle alongwith interest. He has also claimed compensation and litigation expenses.
2. Upon notice, OPs appeared and filed a written reply pleading that complainant can not be allowed to take advantage his own wrong. The vehicle in question has been stolen as a result of negligence of the complainant himself as complainant had left the ignition key of the motorcycle in the Ignition Switch. Thereby, leaving his vehicle in a drivable condition which has contributed and resulted in the theft of the vehicle. As per condition No.4 of the policy, the insured shall take all reasonable steps to safeguard the vehicle from the loss or damage and to maintain it in efficient condition. In the FIR, the complainant has also told the police that he left the ignition key in the motorcycle and went into the shop and when he came out of the shop after 10 minutes, he found his motorcycle missing. Complainant asked to clarify his position vide letter dated 11.5.2015 as to why his claim should not be repudiated. OP received reply from complainant through advocate Sh.KL Dua vide letter dated 18.5.2015 but the same was found to be not satisfactory and the claim of the complainant was repudiated vide letter dated 22.5.2015. OP submitted that OP has rightly repudiated the claim of the complainant as per terms and conditions of the policy.
3. In support of his complaint, learned counsel for the complainant has tendered into evidence affidavit Ex.CA alongwith copies of documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C7 and closed evidence.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for opposite parties has tendered affidavits Ex.OA & Ex.OB alongwith copies of documents Ex.O1 to Ex.O9 and closed evidence.
5. We have heard the Ld. counsel for the parties, minutely gone through the record and have appreciated the evidence produced on record by both the parties with the valuable assistance of Ld. counsels for the parties.
6. From the record i.e. pleadings of the parties and the evidence produced on record by both the parties, it is clear that complainant got his motorcycle Spendour bearing registration No.PB-08-CE-1453 insured with the OP for the period from 24.9.2014 to 23.9.2015 vide cover note Ex.C3. Complainant submitted that on 13.4.2014 at about 11.00 AM, complainant visited the premises of M/s Gold Man Shutter, Model House, Jalandhar City. He parked his motorcycle in front of the shop and went into the shop. Complainant while talking about the work took few steps ahead in the shop. The complainant when came out from the shop, he was stunned to note that motorcycle of the complainant was not there where it was parked and was stolen by some unknown person. Complainant tried his best to find out his motorcycle but in vain. The matter was reported to the police, on the basis of which FIR No.78 dated 16.4.2015 was registered at PS Bhargo Camp, Jalandhar under section 379 of IPC, copy of FIR Ex.C6. The matter was also reported to the OP and the claim was lodged with the OP alongwith relevant documents. However, the OP repudiated the claim of the complainant vide letter dated 11.5.2015 Ex.C1 on the ground that complainant left the ignition key in the ignition switch, thereby leaving his vehicle in the drivable condition which contributed to the theft of vehicle. So, insured has not taken all reasonable steps to safeguard the vehicle for theft or loss. Thereby, he has violated the terms and conditions of the policy. So, OP asked the complainant to explain why the claim of the complainant should not be repudiated. Learned counsel for the complainant submitted that all this amounts to deficiency of service on the part of the OPs qua the complainant.
7. Whereas the case of the OPs is that complainant can not be allowed to take advantage his own wrong. The vehicle in question has been stolen as a result of negligence of the complainant himself as complainant had left the ignition key of the motorcycle in the Ignition Switch. Thereby, leaving his vehicle in a drivable condition which has contributed and resulted in the theft of the vehicle. As per condition No.4 of the policy, the insured shall take all reasonable steps to safeguard the vehicle from the loss or damage and to maintain it in efficient condition. In the FIR Ex.C6, the complainant has also told the police that he left the ignition key in the motorcycle and went into the shop and when he came out of the shop after 10 minutes, he found his motorcycle missing. Complainant asked to clarify his position vide letter dated 11.5.2015 as to why his claim should not be repudiated. OP received reply Ex.O7 from complainant through advocate Sh.KL Dua vide letter dated 18.5.2015 but the same was found to be not satisfactory and the claim of the complainant was repudiated vide letter dated 22.5.2015 Ex.OP8. Learned counsel for the OP submitted that OP has rightly repudiated the claim of the complainant as per terms and conditions of the policy. So, there is no deficiency of service on the part of OPs qua the complainant.
8. From the entire above discussion, we have come to the conclusion that complainant got his motorcycle bearing registration No.PB-08-CE-1453 insured with the OP for the period from 24.9.2014 to 23.9.2015 vide cover note Ex.C3. On 13.4.2015, complainant visited the premises of M/s Gold Man Shutter, Model House, Jalandhar City. He parked his motorcycle outside the premises with ignition key in the motorcycle and went into the shop of M/s Gold Man Shutter, Model House, Jalandhar City. After about 10 minutes he came out of the shop, he found his motorcycle missing. Someone has stolen the same. The complainant tried his best to find out his motorcycle but he failed to trace out the same. Complainant lodged report with the police on 16.4.2015 on the basis of which FIR Ex.O3 was registered at PS Bhargo Camp, Jalandhar as is evident from the copy of FIR Ex.O3. The OP was also informed and the claim was also lodged by the complainant with the OP. The OP appointed investigator who recorded the statement of complainant under the signature of the complainant Ex.O4 in which the complainant himself stated that he parked his motorcycle outside the shop of M/s Gold Man Shutter, Model House, Jalandhar City on 13.4.2015. He left the ignition key of the motorcycle in the ignition switch, thereby leaving the motorcycle in drivable condition. Complainant himself in his statement Ex.O4 admitted that he remained in the shop for 10 minutes and when he came out of the shop after 10 minutes, his motorcycle was stolen by some unknown person. So all this fully proves that complainant did not take proper care/adequate safeguard for the safety of the vehicle as is required from a prudent person. Thereby, complainant has violated condition No.4 of the policy. Not only this, the theft of the motorcycle of the complainant took place on 13.4.2015 at about 11.00 AM but the complainant informed the police regarding this theft on 16.4.2015 at 16.30 hours (FIR Ex.O3) i.e. after a lapse of a period of more than 3 days without any explanation. It has been held by Hon'ble National Commission in case Batta Valji Laxman Vs. ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Limited, 2015(1) CPR 801 that “where the driver of the vehicle admitted that he left the keys of the vehicle in the ignition and went out to a hotel to take tea and when he returned after about 15 minutes, he found his vehicle missing. The vehicle was left unattended for about 15 minutes with key in the ignition. Therefore, insured failed to take adequate safeguard for the safety of the vehicle. The theft took place solely due to negligence on the part of the driver. The OP justified in repudiating the claim of the complainant as per terms and condition of the policy”. Similar are the facts of the present case. We are, therefore, of the opinion that OPs are justified in repudiating the claim of the complainant vide letter dated 22.5.2015 Ex.O8. Consequently, we hold that complaint is without merit and the same is hereby dismissed with no order as to cost. Copies of the order be sent to the parties free of costs under rules. File be consigned to the record room.
Dated Parminder Sharma Bhupinder Singh
21.07.2016 Member President
