Date of Filing: 15-12-2016 Date of Final Order: 27-12-2017
Smt. Runa Ganguly, Member
The fact of the case as enumerated from the complaint petition is that the Complainant purchased one Bajaj Pulsar from the B.K. Motors at Mathabhanga, Cooch Behar, in the month of February, 2014 and the vehicle has been financed by the B.K. Motors. The said vehicle was duly insured with the O.P. Insurance Company i.e. the Oriental Insurance Company bearing policy No.313201/31/2014/8271 which was valid from 25.02.2014 to 24.02.2015. On 12.12.2014 the vehicle of the Complainant bearing No. WB-86/1172 was stolen while it was parked in the premises of Himalaya Kanya Abasan at Bhaktinagar, Jalpaiguri. The Complainant had tried his best but failed to trace out his vehicle and subsequently lodged a complaint before the Bhaktinagar P.S. also informed the matter to the R.T.O Mathabhanga. The Complainant preferred a claim to the O.P. in connection of insurance of the theft vehicle. Thereafter, the Complainant on 06.02.2015 received one letter from the O.P. concerned demanding some documents. The Complainant then submitted all the relevant documents and thereafter made several contacts for settling his claim but all efforts were in vain. Finding no other alternative the Complainant has filed this case U/S 12 of C.P. Act, 1986, praying for reliefs and compensation as incorporated in the prayer portion of the complaint.
The O.P. in this case appeared through his Ld. Agent. The O.P. by filing W/V contested the case contending inter-alia that the present case is not maintainable before this Forum in its present form as well as in law. This O.P. admitted that the O.P. issued an insurance policy in the name of the Complainant under name and style, ‘Motorised-Two Wheelers Package Insurance Policy on 24.02.2014 from its Jalpaiguri Branch but denied all most all the allegations as narrated in different paragraphs of the complaint petition. The main contention of the O.P. is that the alleged theft happened on 12.12.2014 and the insurer was informed on 19.01.2015 i.e. after expiry of stipulated period. Further, the Complainant did not affix the number plate on the vehicle and it is a violation of rules, terms and condition of insurance policy. The O.P. further pleaded that the complainant willfully violated the terms and conditions of the policy resulting repudiation of his claim and the complaint is liable to be dismissed with compensatory costs.
Considering the complaint petition and its Written Version, the following points are necessarily come up for consideration to reach a just decision.
POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION
- Is the Complainant Consumer as per provision under Section 2(1)(d) of the C.P. Act, 1986?
- Has this Forum jurisdiction to entertain the instant complaint?
- Is the O.P guilty of any deficiency in service, as alleged by the Complainant and liable in any way?
- Whether the Complainant is entitled to get any relief/reliefs, as prayed for?
DECISION WITH REASONS
We have gone through the record very carefully and perused the evidence on affidavit of the parties along with relevant documents. Perused also the written argument filed by the parties and heard the argument advanced by the Ld. Agents of the parties at a length.
Point No.1.
Evidently, the Complainant insured his Bujaj Pulser with the O.P Insurance Company vide policy No.313201/31/2014/8271. The O.P. issued the said policy against certain payment. Thus, the Complainant is the consumer of the O.P. as per provision laid down in Sec. 2 (1)(d) of the C.P. Act, 1986.
Point No. 2.
On a meticulous scrutiny of the present complaint it appears that the office of the O.P is situated in Jalpaiguri District which is beyond the territorial jurisdiction of this Forum. The Vehicle of the Complainant in question has been lost from Bhaktinagar i.e. also in the District of Jalpaiguri. Neither the office of the O.P. nor any branch office of the O.P. where cause of action arose is situated within territorial jurisdiction of this Forum. The Complainant in para 11 of his complaint petition clearly stated that the cause of action arose on 12.12.2014 as and when the theft happened and still continuing as he made several correspondence in this regard. It is pertinent to mention that the cause of action did not arose within this district thus, it also does not attract Section 11 © of the C.P. Act, 1986. Further, it appears that in connection with his Insurance policy all correspondence has been made with/by the O.P. Insurance Company, Jalpaiguri.
Thus, considering the above facts and circumstances we have no hesitation to say that this Forum has no territorial Jurisdiction to entertain the present complaint.
Point No. 3 & 4.
As we have already held that this Forum has no territorial jurisdiction to entertain the present complaint, we find no justification to discuss the above points.
Thus, the complaint fails due to lack of jurisdiction.
Hence,
It is Ordered,
That the complaint case No. CC/113/2016 be and the same is dismissed on contest. No order as to costs.
Let plain copy of this Order be supplied to the parties concerned by hand/by Post forthwith, free of cost for information & necessary action. The copy of the Final Order will also be available in the following Website:
confonet.nic.in.
Dictated and corrected by me.
