This is an application of 12 of the CP Act of Sri Chittaranjan Pal (owner of a Lorry being no. WB23B1846) for getting Rs. 10,00,000/- against loss suffered by the complainant and also for payment Rs. 7,500/- under three other heads together with interest on the ground that the Ops (i.e. insurer of the vehicle) have refund to pay the insured value when the vehicle was stolen away.

            The Complaint states that on 22.06.2013 the driver of the Lorry namely Anjur Ali and the Lorry loaded with floure and seeds left the residence of the complainant at Dunlop for Shilong for making delivery of this goods. But on 30.06.2013it could be learnt that neither the Lorry , nor the driver had reach the destination. Accordingly, the Complainant lodged a Complaint with Baranagar P.S on 02.07.2013 for which the P.S Case No. 351 under Section 406, 307 was registered. The said Cases ended in Charge Sheet on 28.02.2015. The Claim was lodged with the insurer for loss of vehicle but the said claim was neither settled nor repudiated. This is why the vehicle owner has filed this present case.  

            The Ops have alleged that the insurer is bound to compensate as the Complainant sustained loss due to breach of trust not for theft. But hey have admitted that the Insurance Policy issued by the insurer in respect to the Lorry concerned was valid form 22.01.2013 to 21.01.2014.

            It is obvious from the record that the vehicle was was entrusted with driver Anjur Ali for a particular purpose and the driver ran away with the vehicle without the consent of the Complainant. A theft case was also registered in local P.S. under Section 379 and other Sections of IPC and the said case resulted in Charge Sheet, but the Investigative Agency could not recover the vehicle or it’s driver. The mere face that chargesheet has been filed in such a case it goes to suggest that theft of the vehicle was committed.

The view taken by the Hon’ble NCDRC in the case between New India Insurance Vs. Neerja Singh (Revision Petition no. 2164 of 2018) dt. 21.08.2018 is that cases of this sort come very well within the ambit of Section 378 and hardly they are appears any scope on the part of the insurer to refuse the claim of the Complainant merely saying that criminal breach of trust has been committed. It therefore goes without saying that the insurer has unjustly refused to pay compensation violating the condition of the policy for payment of compensation case of theft.

The view of the decision made in the case between National Insurance Company Ltd and Nitin Khandenwal on 08.05.2006 that in case of violation of condition of Policy as to the nature of use of the vehicle the claim ought to be settled on non-standard basis, and the claimant would get 75% of the sum assured with interest @ 6% from the date of Complaint till payment. Keeping in view such observation we opine that the insurer in this case would give Complainant 75% of the sum assured with interest @6% from the date of complaint till payment. A sum of Rs. 10,00,000/- was assured under the policy and therefore Rs. 75,00,000/- will have to be paid with interest. That apart a consolidated amount of Rs. 50,000/- for compensation and Rs. 50,000/- for litigation costs will have also to be paid.

            Hence it is ordered that the Ops will pay Rs. 7,50,000/- to the Complainant along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of Complaint till payment within period of two months hence. The Ops will also pay to the Complainant Rs. 50,000/- as litigation cost and Rs. 50,000/- as compensation within two months hence failing which it will accrue interest @ 6% p.a.