West Bengal

Nadia

CC/2013/129

Pradip Chakraborty. - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Br. Manager Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

07 Apr 2015

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
NADIA
170,DON BOSCO ROAD, AUSTIN MEMORIAL BUILDING.
NADIA, KRISHNAGAR
 
Complaint Case No. CC/2013/129
 
1. Pradip Chakraborty.
S/o. Pankaj Chakraborty, Vill Raghabpur Biswaspara P.O. Panpara P.S. Ranaghat Dist Nadia.
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. The Br. Manager Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.
Krishnagar Br. 3/1 D.L.Roy Road P.O. Krishnagar P.S. Kotwali Dist Nadia.
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Pradip Kumar Bandyopadhyay. PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MRS. Reeta Ray Chaudhuar Malakar. MEMBER
 
For the Complainant:
For the Opp. Party:
ORDER

:    J U D G M E N T    :

 

This is a case under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.  The facts of the case to put in a nutshell, are as below:-

The complainant, Pradip Chakraborty purchased a motor cycle / scooter package policy being No. KRO 306721 from the OP, Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. for his motor cycle.  The sum assured of the policy is Rs. 46,170/- for the period from 25.10.2011 (probably) to 24.10.2012 (midnight).   On 10/11.11.2011 the said motor cycle was stolen from the house of the complainant at night.   Subsequently, an FIR was lodged to the Ranaghat P.S. and the concerned P.S. started a case No. 560/11 dtd. 11.11.2011 under Section 379/ 461 IPC.  On 15.11.2011 the complainant informed about this matter to the OP Insurance Company and submitted all the required documents asked by the OP.   The complainant also knew that without final report the OP would not settle the claim of the complainant.   Thereafter, Ranaghat P.S. filed a final report before the ACJM, Ranaghat on 03.04.12 for the theft of the motor cycle of the complainant which was also submitted by the complainant to the opposite party on 28.12.11.  The complainant requested several times to settle the claim but the opposite party paid no heed.  As the theft occurred during the period of insurance coverage the complainant has stated that he is entitled to get the insured amount.  Hence the complainant has filed this case before this Forum praying for an insured amount of Rs. 46,170/- with interest, compensation of Rs. 30,000/- and cost of the suit. 

 A written version was filed by the OP, Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. on 09.04.14 challenging the contentions of the complainant and denied all the allegations made in the complaint.

The sum and substance of the written version is as following:-

 The petition / complaint is bad for defect of parties.  The complaint is not maintainable in its present form.  The petition is misconceived, mala fide and motivated one.  The complaint is barred by law of limitation.  OP has also stated that he requested the complainant to submit all the documents like certified copy of the FIR, Final Report etc. but the petitioner did not file any documents till now to settle the claim.   Thus, it is pending before the OP for want of required documents.   So the complainant is not entitled to get any relief and thus, is liable to be rejected with cost. 

 

 

 

POINTS FOR DECISION

 

  1. Point No. 1:   Is the complainant a consumer?
  2. Point No. 2:    Is the claim bonafide?
  3. Point No. :3   Is the OP deficient in service?
  4. Point No. 4:   What relief the complainant is entitled to get?

 

REASOND DECISIONS

 

            For the purpose of brevity and convenience all the points are taken up together for discussion.

It is admitted that the petitioner has a policy of motor bike given by OP / Oriental Insurance Company Ltd.  Hence, complainant is a consumer under OP. 

It has not been pleaded that the claim is mala fide.  In view of the pleadings and affidavits on record we hold that the claim is bona fide.

It is also admitted position that complainant lodged his claim after the bike in question was stolen.  It is the case of the OP that ignition keys and some documents have not been submitted by complainant.

Perused the annexed documents.  The final report of the case has been filed.  No negligence on the part of complaint has been hinted.  Hence, we hold that the OP is deficient in service. 

Ignition keys were received by OP on 14.12.2011 (vide annexure 4).  ‘Annexure – 8’ is FIR on GR 3062/11.

Another annexure is the FRT.  Annexure – 5 is the insured’s declared value (IDV) that means Rs.46,170/-.  There is warrantor / depreciation that means the complainant is entitled to get Rs. 46,170/ - Rs.4,617/- = Rs. 41,553/-.

 

 

The OP Insurance Company failed to establish that no document was submitted for settlement of the claim.  The evidence of complainant along with the annexures have proved the case of the complainant.   Hence, all the issues are disposed of in favour of the complainant. 

 

 Hence,

                                                         Ordered,

That the case No. CC/2013/129 be and same is allowed on contest against the OP Oriental Insurance Company Ltd.

The OP Oriental Insurance Company ltd. is hereby directed to pay Rs.41,553/- plus Rs. 600/- as compensation i.e., Rs. 42,153/- to the complainant within 30 days from the date order in default 10% interest shall be imposed upon the awarded amount till full payment.

Let the copy of order be supplied to the parties free of cost. 

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Pradip Kumar Bandyopadhyay.]
PRESIDENT
 
[HON'BLE MRS. Reeta Ray Chaudhuar Malakar.]
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.