DIST.CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KHURDA, BHUBANESWAR:
-ooOoo-
C.D.CASE NO. 242/ 2019
Sri Bimal Kumar Garnaik, aged about 29 years,
S/o Sri Bhuban Mohan Garnaik, Sri Vihar, Patia,
Plot No.614/2504, PS- Chandrasekharpur, Bhubaneswar
Now residing At/PO- Irrigation colony, J
eypore, Dist – Koraput- 764 004
…. Complainant
-Vrs.-
The Manager, Bharati Axa GIC Ltd., Plot No.760,
2nd Floor, MJ Plaza, Cuttack-Puri Road, Bhubaneswar-10
… Opp. Party
For the complainant : Mr. Brajaraj Sai (Adv.)
For the O.P. : Mr. B.Mishra (Adv.)
DATE OF FILING : 22/08/2019
DATE OF ORDER : 20 /03/2023
ORDER
K.C.RATH, PRESIDENT
1. This is an application U/s 12 of the C.P.Act, 1986.
2. The complainant’s case in brief is that, he purchased a motor cycle “Bajaj Pulsar-200 NS” and insured it with the OP. The insured value of the said motor cycle was Rs.93,510/-. The Insurance policy was valid from 16/10/2017 to 15/10/2018. It so happened, on 6/12/2017 at about 8:30 PM, the vehicle was stolen from Sahid Nagar Market. The complainant went to the police station and the police advised him to search for the vehicle and if not traced, then to lodge FIR. Accordingly, he searched for the vehicle but did not get it. Finally on 8/12/2017, he lodged FIR before the police station. The police investigated into the case and submitted the final form before the Court stating that the fact true but no clue. He lodged claim before the OP- Insurance Company but the OP rejected the claim due to delay in lodging of FIR and delay in furnishing information to the OP. Hence this complaint.
3. On the other hand, OP filed their written version contending therein that the complainant should have been informed immediately after the theft of the vehicle. Since the complainant reported the matter to the OP at a belated stage, he commits gross negligence and violates the policy condition for which he is not entitled to get the insurance claim. It is further alleged that as there is no cause of action against the OP, the complaint is liable to be dismissed.
4. Perused the materials on record. The photocopy of the insurance policy shows that the motor cycle in question was insured with the OP for an insured value of Rs.93,510/- and the insurance policy was valid from 16/10/2017 to 15/10/2018. During the policy period, theft occurred. No doubt, there is a little delay in lodging the FIR before the police station and lodging the claim before the OP. But considering the totality of the circumstances, I do not find any reason why the complainant should be denied the benefit under the insurance policy just for mere delay. There are so many factors which are responsible for the delay and on that ground only, the OP – Insurance Company cannot escape from the liability which it undertakes by insuring the vehicle in question. Hence, I find merit in the complaint. Hence it is ordered.
ORDER
The complaint is hereby allowed on contest against the OP. The OP is directed to pay the insured value of the vehicle in question amounting to Rs.93,510/- (Rupees ninety-three thousand five hundred ten) only to the complainant. The OP is further directed to pay an amount of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) only to the complainant towards compensation for mental agony suffered by him and a further sum of Rs.2000/- (Rupees two thousand) only towards litigation expenses. The order be complied with by the OP within a period of thirty days from the date of communication of this order, failing which the complainant will be at liberty to execute the order against the OP in accordance with law.
The order is pronounced on this day the 20th March, 2023 under the seal & signature of the President and Member (W) of the Commission.
(K.C.RATH)
PRESIDENT
Dictated & corrected by me
President
I agree
(S.Tripathy)
Member (W)
Transcribed by Smt. M.Kanungo, Sr.Steno
