Karnataka

Chitradurga

CC/78/2015

R.Hanumanthappa S/o. Rudraiah - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Manager,Reliance General Insurance Co.Ltd., - Opp.Party(s)

Shri.N.Nagesha

08 Jul 2016

ORDER

   COMPLAINT FILED ON :01.09.2015

               DISPOSED ON:08/07/2016

 

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHITRADURGA

 

CC. NO. 78/2015 DATED: 8th JULY 2016

 

PRESENT :-     SRI. T.N. SREENIVASAIAH      PRESIDENT                                      B.A., LL.B.,

                        SMT.G.E.SOWBHAGYALAKSHMI,       

                                         B.A., LL.B.,                   MEMBER

 

COMPLAINANTS	R. Hanumanthappa, S/o Rudraiah, Major, Owner of Lorry No.KA-16/A-8744, R/o Shivaganga, Holalkere Taluk, Chitradurga.   (Rep by Smt/Sri.N. Nagesha,  Advocate)
OPPOSITE PARTY	The Manager, Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd., No.28, East-Wing, 5th Floor, Century Building, M.G. Road, Bangalore.   (Rep by Smt/Sri. B.M. Ravichandra,  Advocate)

SMT.G.E. SOWBHAGYALAKSHMI, MEMBER.

ORDER

 

The complainant has been filed this complaint U/s 12 of C.P. Act 1986 against the opposite party (here in called OP) to direct the OP to pay Rs.10,00,000/- with interest at the rate of 18% p.a and to grant court cost and such other reliefs.

 2.    Brief facts of the complaint is that, complainant  is the owner of a lorry bearing No.KA-16/A-8744 Engine No.LNH524842 Chassis No.LNA092097 Model Ashok Leyland 2214 and the same was insured the OP, the policy was in force as on the date of accident.  The OP collected upto date premium to cover the risk of the policy under the policy bearing No.1406532334001642 and it is valid from 23.07.2013 to 22.07.2014 and the other vehicular documents such as RC, FC, Permit etc., are in order.

The  complainant entrusted his vehicle lorry bearing No.KA-16/A-8744 to his GPA holder B.V. Manjunatha S/o B.V. Venugopala, of Burujanahatty, Chitradurga Town.  That on 29.03.2014 after loading the veski at Dharwad to the above said lorry and the same was unloaded at Chitradurga on 30.03.2014.  When the said lorry was standing near B.D. Road, Industrial Cross, Chitradurga at about 10 PM instructed to the cleaner to sleep in the said lorry.  Due to ill-health the cleaner of the said lorry sleeping in the office, that on 31.03.2014 at 5 PM the cleaner of the lorry intimated to its owner stated that, the said lorry was not at the spot, some of the thieves have stolen the said lorry, the GPA holder of the said lorry while searching his lorry at various places, but his lorry was not traced out even to this date.  That the complainant is having confidence that he is every chances and likely to trace out his lorry, but he failed to trace out his lorry. 

The complainant was intimated theft of his lorry bearing No.KA-16/A-8744 to the OP, along with all the vehicular documents and police documents, after the intimation, they have issued endorsement stating that, transferring of possession it may GPA that could not effect to any insurance claim as the insurance company falsely contended to burden to liability to the complainant.  The complainant on behalf of him B.V. Manjunatha, GPA Holder is estimable owner at the time of missing the vehicle. 

Complainant further stated that, after furnished all the vehicular documents to the OP, as per the letter of OP, the complainant awaiting to receive the compensation.  But surprisingly the OP intentionally replied the letter to pull the darkroom of his customer, stating that resolving the issues, this is against the consumer protection of law, and hence, we propose to repudiate the claim and disclaim our liability, thereby the complainant suffered lot, put into great mental shock, agony and pain.  The OP who is not deserved to settle the legal claim has sent a surprise reply the matter reference above and number. 

It is stated that, the OP has bound to indemnify the theft without delay even the matter immediately impact with him.  He never discharged his deliberate service, by the deficiency of the service of the OP, the complainant sustained financial loss of Rs.1,00,000/- and without reasonable ground, OP has refused the claim.  Hence, this complaint.

The complainant has demanded and requested the OP to settle the claim or otherwise to sent back the certified copies of the criminal case papers, policy copy and other relevant documents but, the OP has neglected to comply the request, the OP has deliberately fails to discharge his service than the desired service. 

The complainant got issued legal notice to the OP through his advocate dated 02.07.2015 by RPAD and the same was served upon the OP but, till today the OP neither replied the said notice nor settled the claim of the complainant. 

The cause of action for this complaint aroses on 31.03.2014 and the complainant lodged the complaint to the concerned police on 01.04.2014 and in subsequent, the complainant got issued the legal notice to the OP dated 02.07.2015, since the complaint is in time, the OP is an authorized agent used to collect the premium at Bangalore OP's Branch office situated at Chitradurga city.  Hence, this Forum has got jurisdiction to try the matter and prayed for allow the complaint with cost. 

           

3.     On service of notice. OP appeared through its counsel and filed version.  While admitting the issuance of policy to the complainant's vehicle bearing No.KA-16/A-8744 for a period of 23.07.2013 to 22.07.2014 and denied the averments in para 2 to 10 made in the complaint. 

Op stated that, he complainant has not approached the Forum with clean hands as required under Consumer Protection Act and Law of Insurance and also under policy issued by OP under M.V. Act. 

That the vehicle bearing Reg.No.KA-16/A-8744 alleged to have been stolen the vehicle on 30.03.2014 at about 10-00 PM and one B.V. Manjunatha has intimated the theft of the vehicle on 08.04.2014.  After the said intimation the OP insurance company has appointed one Siraj who is a Surveyor and Loss Assessor and as per the intimation of the OP insurance company the said surveyor has searched the vehicle and he would not find the same and he has given his investigation report dated 06.05.2014 to the OP insurance company.

OP further stated that, one B.V. Manjunatha has given claim form dated 08.04.2014 stating that, he is the owner of the vehicle and along with claim form he has given sale letter of lorry from Hanumanthappa to Manjunatha and vehicle documents, Police records and also a letter to the Manager, Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd., dated 08.04.2014. 

That as per the said letter of complainant dated 08.04.2014 to the Manager, Reliance General Insurance Co.Ltd., Bangalore that the complainant has stated in his letter that the B.V. Manjunatha is the owner of lorry bearing Reg. No.KA-16/A-8744 and he has been purchased the vehicle from one Hanumanthappa and obtained the power of attorney and also sale deed and he has depositing the loan amount to the financier and the same was noted in a agreement and also the complainant has given the possession of the vehicle bearing Reg. No.KA-16/A-8744, hence as per the said letter the complainant is not the owner of the vehicle and he has sold his vehicle to B.V. Manjunatha and also there is no insurable interest on the vehicle, since the vehicle is in the possession of the complainant and also the same was not in position, hence OP insurance company is not liable to pay the compensation to the complainant. 

OP stated that the OP insurance company after obtaining claim form from B.V. Manjunatha, all documents like policy, DL, permit, FC, Police records and his letter dated 08.04.2014 that the lorry bearing Reg. No.KA-16/A-8744 has been sold to one B.V. Manjunatha on 13.08.2012 as per sale deed.

As per GR 17 transfers the transferee shall apply within 14 days from the date of transfer in writing under recorded delivery to the insurer who has insured the vehicle with the details of registration of the vehicle, the date of transfer of the vehicle, the previous owner of the vehicle and the number and date of insurance policy so that, the insurer may make the necessary changes in his record and issue fresh certificate of insurance. 

As per the all India Motor Tariff formulated by IRDA there should exists insurance interest at the time of taking policy as well as at the time of loss.  In the captioned claim the same was not in position.  In the circumstances, the claim is not admissible.  That B.V. Manjunatha has intimated the theft of the vehicle bearing Reg. No.KA-16/A-8744 on 08.04.2014, wherein the theft of the vehicle is on 30.03.2014 and FIR was lodged on 01.04.2014 and the said intimation to our insurance company is after 8 days from the date of theft.  That means the complainant has violated the condition No.1 of the said Motor Policy which runs as follows:-

 

"Notice shall be given in writing to the company immediately upon the occurrence of any accidental loss or damage in the event of any claim and thereafter the insured shall give all such information and assistance as the company shall require.  Every letter claim writ summons and/or process or copy thereof shall be forwarded to the company immediately on receipt by the insured.  Notice shall also be given in writing to the company immediately the insured shall have knowledge of any impending prosecution, inquest or fatal inquiry in respect of any occurrence which may give rise to a claim under this policy.  In case of theft or criminal act which may be the subject of a claim under this policy and co-operative with the company in securing the conviction of the offender".

 

 

It is stated that as per the said condition the complainant has approached to our company is on 08.04.2014 which is after lapse of 8 days from the date of theft of the vehicle.  Hence, it is a violation of policy condition by the complainant. 

 

From the above said reasons it shows the complainant has filed this complaint with flimsy and untenable grounds without any proper reasons and there is no deficiency in service on the part of OP and prayed for dismiss the complaint with exemplary cost. 

 

4. Complainant himself examined as PW-1 by filing affidavit evidence in which reiterated the contents of the complainant and filed documents like True copy of the FIR,  True copy of the complaint dated 01.04.2014, True copy of the C-report, Xerox copy of the R.C, copy of the Policy, office copy of the legal notice, original postal acknowledgement, Reliance Goods Carrying vehicle certificate-cum-policy schedule, except Xerox copies, the documents were got marked as Ex A-1 to A-6.

 

5.     On behalf of the OP one Sri. H.B. Guruprasad S/o Late Basavarajaiah, Deputy Manager, examined as DW-1 by filing affidavit evidence in which reiterated the contents of the version and filed 13 documents the same were got marked as Ex.B-1 to Ex.B-13.

 

        6. Heard the arguments.

 

7.     Now the Points that arise for our consideration for the decision of the complaint are that:-

 

Point No.1:-Whether the complainant proves that,  he is the owner of Ashoka Leyland lorry bearing Reg. No.KA-16/A-8744 and the said vehicle is insured with OP and the policy was in force for the period from 23.07.2013 to 22.07.2014 and the said vehicle was stolen on 31.03.2014 while parking near B.D. Road, Industrial Cross, Chitradurga and complainant was entrusted his vehicle to his GPA Holder B.V. Manjunatha and on the date of theft the policy was in force?

 

Point No.2:- Whether the complainant proves that the GPA Holder B.V. Manjunatha has been informed to the OP and Police towards the theft of the vehicle on 31.03.2014 and on behalf of the complainant, his GPA Holder produced all relevant documents to OP for settlement of the claim but, OP repudiated the claim of the complainant on 30.12.2014 and thereby OP has committed deficiency of service and entitled for the reliefs?

 

Point No.3:- What order?

      

8. Our findings on the above points are as below.

 

        Point No.1:-Affirmative.

Point No.2:- Partly Affirmative.

        Point No.3:- As per the final order.

 

                                ::REASONS::

 

9. Point Nos. 1 & 2:-  We like to discuss the point No.1 and 2 simultaneously for the sake of convenience.  It is not in dispute that the complainant is the R.C Owner of the lorry Ashoka Leyland bearing Reg. No.KA-16/A-8744.  The said vehicle is insured with the OP and the policy bearing No.1406532334001642 is valid from 23.07.2013 to 22.07.2014 and the policy covers own damage for an amount of Rs.9,00,000/- (IDV) and also covers the risk of third party injury, third party property damage and the said policy was in force,  It is not in dispute that the complainant vehicle stolen on 31.03.2014, while it was parking near B.D. Road, Industrial Cross, Chitradurga.  It is not in dispute that the policy was in force on the date and time of the stole of the vehicle.  It is only in dispute that the complainant has intimated the theft of his vehicle to the OP insurance company after lapse of 8 days from the date of theft of the vehicle.  It is only in dispute that the OP has repudiated the claim of the complainant on 30.12.2014 and thereby committed deficiency of service and unfair trade practice. 

10.  To prove the case of the complainant, complainant himself examined as PW-1 by filing affidavit evidence in which he has reiterated the contents of the complaint and filed documents, the same were got marked as Ex.A-1 to A-6.

11.  On perusal of the complaint, affidavit evidence, written arguments and the documents, it reveals that, the complainant is the R.C owner of the vehicle i.e., Ashoka Leyland lorry bearing Reg. No.KA-16/A-8744 and the said vehicle is insured with the OP insurance company.  The policy was valid for the period from 23.07.2013 to 22.07.2014.  The policy was in force on the date and time of theft of the vehicle.  The said policy covers the own damage for an amount of Rs.9,00,000/- (IDV) and also covers the risk of third party injury, third party property damage. 

12.  On perusal of the documents filed by the complainant Ex.A-1 & A-2 shows that, the complainant vehicle was parked on 30.03.2014 at about 10-00 PM near B.D Road, Industrial Cross, Chitradurga which is stolen on 31.03.2014 in between 5-00 PM.  Ex.A-3 shows that, the vehicle bearing Reg. No.KA-16/A-8744 is not traced, concerned police filed C-report before the Hon'ble JMFC, Chitradurga on 27.02.2015, Ex.A-4 legal notice issued by the complainant through his counsel on 02.07.2015 through RPAD to OP company calling upon the OP to settle the claim of the complainant within 15 days from the date of service of notice, Ex.A-5 postal acknowledgement, it shows legal notice was duly served to the OP on 15.07.2014 but, OP neither replied the said notice nor settled the claim of the complainant.  Ex.A-6 Reliance Goods Carrying vehicle certificate-cum-policy schedule, shows the OP issued the policy to the complainant's vehicle bearing No.KA-16/A-8744, the period of insurance from 23.07.2013 to 22.07.2014 on 23-59 hours.  It further shows the policy No.140652334001642 and the insured name R. Hanumanthappa S/o Rudraiah, Shivaganga, Holalkere Taluk, Chitradurga District, Karnataka State-577523, IDV valud Rs.9,00,000/- and final premium Rs.30,912-66.  It shows the OP received the total premium of Rs.30,912/- and it further shows in the policy box.

 

" In the unfortunate event of claim, please call along with your policy Number on 18001031999 (toll free) or 02241112600 (Standard STD Rates Apply) and register your claim immediately within 7 days from the date of loss". 

 

It reveals that the insured in the unfortunate event of claim, intimate or register the claim immediately to the OP within 7 days from the date of loss.  So, in this case, the complainant intimated the OP company within 7 days as per Ex.B-10 document dated 10.04.2014.  Ex.B-10 document the letter dated 10.04.2014 issued by the OP to complainan, it shows that letter Sub: " total theft claim intimation dated 03.04.2014, claim No.2141043470, Reg. No.KA-16/A-8744, Policy No.1406532334001642".  The document filed by the OP it is clearly shows that the information given by the complainant, his vehicle was stolen on 31.03.2014 at Chitradurga near B.D. Road, Industrial Cross road to the OP company on 03.04.2014 and it shows the claim was registered in the OP, the same was numbered claim No.2141043470.  So, as per the Ex.A-6 policy condition, within 7 days complainant has given the information to the OP for the theft of his vehicle bearing Reg. No.KA-16/A-8744.  It shows OP appointed the investigator to investigate the claim.  It shows claim form (4 pages). 

13.  Complainant Advocate argued that, the GPA Holder B.V. Manjunatha the driver of the vehicle and he was given the complaint to the Kote Police Station on 01.04.2014 about the theft of vehicle bearing Reg. No.KA-16/A-8744, in the said complaint he stated that, " ¸ÀĪÀiÁgÀÄ FUÉÎ MAzÀƪÀgÉ ªÀµÀðzÀ »AzÉ PÉ.J. 16-J-8744£Éà ²æà ºÀj mÁæ£ïì¥ÉÆÃmïð £ÁªÀÄ¥sÀ®PÀªÀżÀî ¯ÁjAiÀÄ£ÀÄß Dgï. ºÀ£ÀĪÀÄAvÀ¥Àà£À PÀqɬÄAzÀ £Á£ÀÄ ¥ÀªÀgï D¥sï CmÁð¤AiÀÄ£ÀÄß ªÀiÁr¹PÉÆArzÀÄÝ ¯ÁjAiÀÄ£ÀÄß £Á£Éà ZÁ®PÀ£ÁV £ÉÆÃrPÉƼÀÄîwÛzÉÝ£ÀÄ". He is the GPA Holder and the driver of the said vehicle since 1 ½ years.  The said vehicle was insured with the OP by paying premium of Rs.30,913/- the said policy covered the risk for the damage of the vehicle for an amount of Rs.9,00,000/- and the policy period from 23.07.2013 to 22.07.2014 mid-night.  The said vehicle stolen on 31.03.2014.  The GPA Holder lodged the complaint on 01.04.2014 to the concerned police and intimated the OP company immediately. On 03.04.2014 the complainant intimated the OP towards the theft of his vehicle.  On the date and time of the theft of the vehicle, the policy was in force.  Hence, OP is liable to pay the compensation and prayed for allow the complaint with cost.

14.  On perusal of the verion, affidavit evidence and documents filed by the OP, OP has taken main contention that, the theft of the complainant's vehicle intimation received by the OP after lapse of 8 days.  The OP appointed one Siraj who is a Surveyor and Loss Assessor of OP company.  The said surveyor has searched the vehicle and he could not find the same and he has given his investigation report dated 06.05.2014 to the OP and complainant has violated the condition No.1 of the policy.  As per the condition, the complainant approached the OP on 08.04.2014 which is after lapse of 8 days and he fails to inform the theft of his vehicle immediately.  After lapse of 8 days from the date of theft of the vehicle the complainant informed to the OP.  Hence, it is violation of policy condition by the complainant and there is no deficiency in service on the part of OP and prayed for dismissal of the complaint with cost. 

15.  Advocate for OP vehemently argued that, one B.V. Manjunatha has given claim form dated 08.04.2014 stated that, he is the owner of the vehicle along with claim form and he has given sale letter of lorry from Hanumanthappa to Manjunatha and vehicle documents, police records and also a letter to the Manager.

16.  OP Advocate further argued that as per FIR and charge sheet and also the statement given by B.M. Manjunatha who is the owner cum driver of the lorry bearing Ref No.KA-16/A-8744 and as per FIR and charge sheet the concerned Police has been stated that the vehicle belongs to one B.V. Manjunatha who is the owner cum driver of the vehicle and he is the owner of the vehicle.  Hence it shows that the complainant is not the owner of the vehicle and the complainant is not having any insurable interest in the vehicle and he is not having any possession of the vehicle.  OP insurance company after obtaining claim form from B.V. Manjunatha all documents and his letter dated 08.04.2014 that the lorry bearing Reg. No.KA-16/A-8744 has been sold to one B.V. Manjunatha on 13.08.2012 as per sale deed.  As per the all India Motor Tariff formulated by IRDA there should exists insurable interest at the time of taking policy as well as at the time of loss.  In the captioned claim the same was not in position.  In the circumstances, the claim is not admissible.  Complainant has approached the OP is on 08.04.2014 which is after lapse of 8 days from the date of theft of the vehicle.  Hence, it is a violation of policy conditions by the complainant and there is no deficiency in service on the part of OP and prayed for dismissal of the complaint with cost and relied on the following decisions:

 

1) 2013(2) CPR 78 (NC)

2) 2013(1) CPR 479 (NC)

3) III (2003) CPJ 77 (NC)

4) 2013(1) CPR 363 (NC)

5) 2013(1) CPR 394 to 397 (NC)

6) 2013(1) CPR 328 to 331 and

7) Order in First Appeal No.321/2005

    dated 09.12.2009

 

17.  The above said decisions are all not applicable to the case on hand.  The facts and circumstances of each case are different to the present case on hand. On perusal of the entire case paper and documents and citations relied on by the OP and on perusal of Ex.A-6 policy, it is clearly shows that, "In the unfortunate event of claim please call along with your policy number and register your claim immediately within 7 days from the date of loss".  It shows "register your claim immediately within 7 days from the date of loss".  Ex.B-10 document i.e., letter dated 10.04.2014 shows sub: "Your total theft claim intimation dated 03.04.2014, claim No.21410470, Reg. No.KA-=16/A-8744, Policy No.1406532334001642." Ex.B-10 letter issued by the OP shows, OP addressed and corresponded to the complainant and also Ex.B-9 claim form shows the personal details of the complainant (owner) name is Hanumanthappa i.e., complainant.  Name of the driver at the time of theft shows the name of B.V. Manjunatha, all the police records shows the B.V. Manjunatha is the GPA Holder of the complainant and he is acted as a GPA Holder and he gave a complaint on behalf of the complainant.  R.C, F.C, Insurance Policy show that the complainant is the owner of the vehicle.  Ex.B-10 letter dated 10.04.2014 issued by the OP to the complainant through RPAD. OP document Ex.B-10 reveals that the complainant has given intimation to the OP on 03.04.2014 within 3 days from the date theft of his vehicle and there is no delay in giving information to the insurance company as contended by the OP and at the time of incident, the policy was in force and the IDV value is  Rs.9,00,000/-.  OP is liable to pay the compensation to the complainant.

18.  On perusal of the Xerox copy of the sale agreement, it is not registered and also it is clearly shows that after payment of entire loan amount, R.C and F.C will be changed in the name of buyer.  So, the condition of the sale agreement it is not fulfilled and the said sale procedure is completed.  Hence, the R.C is not changed.  If the R.C is transferred, G.R if transfers condition is not applicable.  Ex.B-1 Policy shows the complainant is the RC owner and Xerox copy of the RC is also shows the complainant is the owner and all the letters i.e., Ex.B-3, B-5, B-7, B-9 to B-13 show the complainant is the owner of the vehicle bearing Reg.No.KA-16/A-8744.  Hence, the OP has no reason to escape from the liability.  On perusal of the version and affidavit at page 2 para 3(c) that, "OP insurance company appointed one Siraj, Surveyor and Loss Assessor, the said Surveyor has searched the vehicle and he could not find the same and he has given his investigation report dated 06.05.2014 to the OP company "but, OP has not filed the report before this Forum and OP has not filed the affidavit evidence of the Surveyor.  It shows OP has purposely avoiding the complainant for settlement of the claim.  It is clearly shows that the OP has committed deficiency of service towards the complainant.  Non settlement of the claim of the complainant it amounts to deficiency of service on the part of OP.  The attitude of the OP is also amounts to an unfair trade practice towards the complainant.  Hence, the OP is liable to pay the compensation to the complainant.  Therefore, we have no agitation to say that the complainant is entitled to the compensation of Rs.9,00,000/- along with 6% interest from the date of complaint till the payment and also complainant is entitled for a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards mental agony and Rs.5,000/- towards the cost of the proceedings.  Accordingly, we answer the  Point No.1 held as affirmative and Point No.2 is held as partly affirmative. 

 

 19.  Point No.3:- As discussed on the above point and for the reasons stated therein, we pass the following:

 

ORDER

 

The complaint filed by the complainant U/s 12 of CP Act 1986 is partly allowed.

 

It is ordered that, the OP is directed to pay a sum of Rs.9,00,000/- along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a to the complainant from the date of complaint till the payment within two months from the date of this order. 

 

It is further ordered that, the OP is directed to pay a sum of  Rs.10,000/- towards mental agony and Rs.5,000/- towards the costs of this proceedings to the complainant. 

Accordingly, the complaint is partly allowed.

       

 

(This order is made with the consent of President and after the correction of the draft on 08/07/2016 and it is pronounced in the open Court after our signatures.)

 

 

 

MEMBER                                                 PRESIDENT

 

 

-:ANNEXURES:-

 

Complainant by filing affidavit evidence taken as PW-1

Witness examined on behalf of Complainant:

                                                -Nil-

On behalf of the OP one Sri. H.B. Guruprasad, Deputy Manager, examined as DW-1

Witness examined on behalf of OP:

                                                -Nil-

Documents marked on behalf of Complainant:

01	Ex-A-1:-	True copy of the FIR
02	Ex-A-2:-	True copy of the complaint dated 01.04.2014
03	Ex.A-3:-	True copy of the C-report
04	Ex.A-4:-	Office copy of the legal notice
05	Ex.A-5:-	Original postal acknowledgement
06	Ex.A-6:-	Reliance Goods Carrying vehicle certificate-cum-policy schedule

 

Documents marked on behalf ofOP:

01	Ex-B-1:-	Certified copy of Policy
02	Ex-B-2:-	Intimation letter dated 08.04.2014 by B.V. Manjunatha
03	Ex.B-3:-	Intimation letter dated 09.04.2014 by complainant to RTO
04	Ex.B-4:-	Postal receipt
05	Ex.B-5:-	Intimation letter dated 09.04.2014 by complainant to Customer Care, Ashok Leyland
06	Ex.B-6:-	Postal receipt
07	Ex.B-7:-	Intimation letter dated 09.04.2014 by complainant to National Crime Record Beuro
08	Ex.B-8:-	Postal receipt
09	Ex.B-9:-	Motor Claim Form
10	Ex.B-10:-	Letter dated 10.04.2014 appointing Investigator by the OP
11	Ex.B-11:-	Postal receipt and acknowledgement
12	Ex.B-12 & 13:-	Letter dated 30.12.2014 with Postal receipt.

 

 

MEMBER                                         PRESIDENT

Rhr.