Sri Shyamal Gupta, Member

The fact of the Complainant Case in a nutshell is Complainant purchased a goods vehicle i.e. dumper being no. WB-15B-9615 and being Engine No. B591803231A63310294 and Chasis No. MAT448117D3A02022 at Rs.24,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Four Lacs) on a hire purchase agreement with the Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company Ltd. That after purchasing the said vehicle, your Complainant took an insurance package policy Zone C from O.P no. 1, Shriram General Insurance Co. Ltd. being Policy no. 334027/31/14/000225 and the policy was valid from 04.05.2013 to 03.05.2014. That the vehicle was theft on 10.05.2013 at about 11:25 p.m. which was informed to the Chanditala P.S. in the next morning i.e. on 11.05.2013. Complainant gave intimation of theft to the O.P No. 1’s head office i.e. in the office of the O.P No. 2 at Sitapura, Joypur on 17.05.2013. Cause of Action arose on 08.01.2014 when the O.P No. 2’s office sent a letter to Complainant repudiating the said claim on the flimsy ground of 11 days delays.

Finally Complainant lodged this case claiming Rs. 24,00,000/- + interest + compensation from O.P No. 1.

O.P filed WV. Heard both sides at length and perused the document i.e. FIR/FRT/Letter dated 08.01.2014 of O.P No. 1 showing ‘No Claim’ etc.

Now, admittedly there is ‘delayed information’ of 11 days. Now over this aspect the observation of the Hon’ble Apex Court is as follows:-

Sourashtra Chemicals Ltd –Vs- National Insurance Co. Ltd 2019(4) CPR 654(SC)

“If insurer has not taken delay in intimation as a specific ground in letter of repudiation, they cannot do so at stage of hearing consumer complaint before NCDRC”

Om Prakash –Vs- Reliance General Insurance & Anr IV (2017) CPJ10 (SC)

“Rejection of the claims on purely technical grounds in a mechanical manner will result in loss of confidence of policy – holders in the insurance industry. If the reason for delay in making a claim is satisfactorily explained, such a claim cannot be rejected on the ground of delay.”

Galada Power and Telecommunication Ltd- Vs-United India Insurance Company Ltd & Anr. (2016) 14 SCC 161

“Since the letter of repudiation does not even remotely refer to delayed intimation or delayed claim, the said ground cannot be taken as a defence to the claim.”

Oriental Insurance Company Ltd-Vs- Parvesh Ch Chada (Civil Appeal No. 6739 of 2010)

“Delay in intimation of occurrence may weaken claim for compensation.”

Surendra kr Bhilawe –Vs- New India Assurance Co. Ltd II(2020) CPJ 80(SC)

“Delay if any, on part of traumatized driver to lodge FIR, cannot defeat legitimate claim of insured.”

Gurshinder Singh –Vs- Shriram General Insurance Co Ltd (Civil Appeal No 653 of 2020)

“When an insured has lodged the FIR immediately after the theft of a vehicle occurred and when the police after investigation have lodged a final report after the vehicle was not traced and when the surveyors/investigators appointed by the insurance company have found the claim of the theft to be genuine, then mere delay in intimating the insurance company about the occurrence of the theft cannot be a ground to deny the claim of the insured.”

National Insurance Company Ltd-Vs- Nitin Khandelwal IV (2008) CPJ 1 (SC)

“The violation of any terms and conditions of the policy (i.e. delay) is not germane in a case of theft and the claim should be allowed.”

Amalendu Sahoo-Vs- Oriental Insurance Co Ltd. II (2010) CPJ 9 (SC)

“If certain condition of the policy (i.e. delay) which is not a fundamental condition is violated, the insurance claim can be settled on non-standard basis under which the claim can be accepted 75% of the accepted claim.”

In view of the said back drop OP Nos. 1 and 2 are directed to pay Rs.18,00,000/- (being 75% of IDV i.e. Rs. 24,00,000/-) to the Complainant along with 6% p.a. instant from the date of filing of the complaint till actual payment.

Thus the instant case is allowed in part against O.P Nos. 1 and 2 and dismissed against O.P No. 3.