Haryana

Ambala

CC/33/2021

Sh Satish Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

The New India Assurance Co Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

05 Jul 2022

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, AMBALA.

 

                                                          Complaint Case No.:  33 of 2021.

                                                          Date of Institution :   18.01.2021.

                                                          Date of decision    :   05.07.2022.

 

Shri Satish Kumar aged about 53 years son of Shri Bachhi Ram, resident of House No.100-A, Bharat Nagar, Dayal Bagh, Near Bharam Kumari Ashram, Ambala Cantt.

                                                                             ……. Complainant.

                                                Versus

 

1.       The New India Assurance Company Limited, Branch Office at 5406, 2^nd Floor, Cross Road No.3, Punjabi Mohalla, Ambala Cantt.,         through its Senior Branch Manager.

2.       M/s Sai Enterprises, 117, Alexendra Road, Opp. G.M.N. College,        Ambala Cantt., through its Authorized Signatory.

           ..…..Opposite Parties.

         

Before:        Smt. Neena Sandhu, President.

                   Smt. Ruby Sharma, Member.

Shri Vinod Kumar Sharma, Member.          

                                                

Present:       Shri Narender Kumar Sharma, Advocate, counsel for                                    complainant.

Ms. Priya Sharma, Advocate, counsel for the OP No.1.

OP No.2 already given up vide order dated 27.08.2021.

         

Order:        Smt. Neena Sandhu, President.

1.                Complainant has filed this complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) against the Opposite Parties (hereinafter referred to as ‘OPs’) prayed that OPs may be directed, to pay the claim amount of Rs.48,975/- and Rs.50,000/-, as compensation for the mental agony and physical harassment suffered by the complainant alongwith interest @ 18% per annum from the date of theft of the motorcycle, till the date of payment and also litigation expenses and any other relief which this Hon’ble Commission may deem fit.

2.       Brief facts of the case are that the complainant on 29.08.2016, purchased a motorcycle make Splendor, bearing registration No.HR01AP-7506, Chassis No.MBLHA10CGGHG52476, Engine No.HA10ERGHG49999 for an amount of Rs.48,975/- and got it insured vide policy No.35350131180300002558 with the OP No.1 for the period from 29.08.2018 to 28.08.2019 by paying premium of Rs.1298/-. On 01.07.2019, complainant went on his motorcycle to purchase the clothes from the cloth market at Gandhi ground and parked it outside Gandhi ground but after one hour when he returned back, he could not found the same. Complainant searched it but could not trace it out and informed to the police regarding the theft of his motorcycle. He also lodged FIR No.0348 dated 04.07.2019, under Section 379 IPC with the Police Station Ambala Cantt. At the time of theft of the motorcycle, the registration certificate, insurance policy and other papers were lying in the motorcycle. On 02.07.2019, complainant also informed the OPs about the theft of the vehicle. The police authorities failed to trace the motorcycle and presented the untrace report before the Court of Shri Vivek Yadav, learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ambala, vide UCR No.535 of 2020, which was duly accepted by the said Hon’ble Court vide order dated 24.09.2020. Complainant submitted all the documents with the OP No.1 but OP No.1 did not take any action to pay the claim. Vide letter dated 05.02.2020 and 19.02.2020, OP No.1 asked the complainant to documents. Vide letter dated 28.02.2020, the OP No.1 intentionally closed the claim of the complainant. Complainant wrote letters dated 02.03.2020, 06.07.2020 and 28.09.2020, requesting therein to pay the claim amount. Vide letter dated 08.10.2020, OP No.1 informed that it approved the claim on total loss basis and asked him to send the cancellation certificate of RC.  The RC of the motor cycle was stolen alongwith the motorcycle and the OP No.1, intentionally not paying the claim amount. Hence, the present complaint.

3.       Upon notice, OP No.1 appeared through counsel and filed written version and raised preliminary objections with regard to maintainability etc. On merits, it is stated that the IDV of the lost vehicle is Rs.33,950/- and excess of Rs.100/-  so as per that the IDV of the vehicle was Rs.33,850/- and not allegedly Rs.48,975. The said vehicle got stolen on 01.07.2019, due to the negligence of the complainant and he intimated about the same to the police on 04.07.2019 and to the OP after the lapse of many days, whereas as per the terms and conditions of the policy “notice shall be given in writing to the company immediately upon occurrence of any incident”. Further document shall be submitted with the insurer in stipulated time as the claim file cannot be open for unlimited period. After receiving the claim regarding the theft of the vehicle, vide letters dated 31.12.2019, 09.01.2020, 05.02.2020 and 19.02.2020, complainant was asked to submit the Untraceable report, Discharge Voucher and NCRB report but he neither submitted the documents nor replied the said letter. On 28.02.2020, answering OP sent a final notice to the complainant that “till date you have not submitted the documents. Hence we are sorry to inform you that we are closing your file as No Claim”.  Rest of the averments of the complainant were denied by OP No.1 and prayed for dismissal of the complaint with heavy costs.

4.                Learned counsel for the complainant had given up the OP No.2, through his statement recorded on 27.08.2021. Accordingly, OP No.2, given up vide order dated 27.08.2021, by this Commission.

5.                 Complainant tendered his affidavit as Annexure CA along with documents Annexure C-1 to C-23 and closed the evidence of the complainant. On the other hand, learned counsel for the OP No.1 tendered affidavit of Shri Mona Bagga, aged about 48 years, Sr. Divisional Manager/Authorized Signatory, The New India Assurance Company Limited, Ambala Cantt. as Annexure OP/A alongwith documents Annexure OP-1 to OP-3 and closed the evidence on behalf of OP No.1.

6.       We have heard learned counsel for the complainant and learned counsel for the OP No.1 and have also gone through the record very carefully.

7.       Learned counsel for the complainant has submitted that on 29.08.2016, he purchased the motorcycle in question for Rs.48,975/-, same was duly insured with the OP No.1, for the period from 29.08.2018 to 28.08.2019. During the subsistence of the policy on 01.07.2019, it got stolen and at the time of theft, registration certificate, insurance policy and other papers were lying in the motorcycle. Complainant lodged the FIR with the police and informed the OPs, regarding the theft of the motorcycle and also deposited all the documents, with the OP No.1. Complainant lodged the claim with the OPs but they did not indemnify for the loss suffered by him.  He further submitted that documents demanded by the OP No.1 are not in the possession of the complainant same cannot be provided to it. He submitted that in the case of Gurmel Singh Vs. Branch Manager, National Insurance Company Limited/2022 LiveLaw (SC), 506/22.05.2022, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, has held that while settling the claims, insurance company should not ask for the documents, which the insured is not in a position to produce due to circumstances beyond his control.  

8.                On the contrary, learned counsel for the OP No.1 has submitted that the OP No.1 has rightly closed the claim of the complainant as no claim because complainant was asked to hand over the certificate of cancellation  of RC to the insurance company but did not provide the same. Inspite of the fact that he had not provided the said certificate, the insurance company is still ready to pay 75% of the IDV of the motorcycle.

9.                The question of consideration is that as to whether repudiation of the claim of the complainant on the ground of non-submission of documents, which were not in the possession of the complainant, was justified. In the case of Gurmel Singh Vs. Branch Manager, National Insurance Company Limited (Supra), the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has held that while settling the claims the insurance company should not be too technical and ask for the documents, which the insured is not in a position to produce due to circumstances beyond his control. The case of the complainant is squarely covered under the said judgement. In this view of the matter the insurance  company i.e OP No.1 is not justified in closing the claim file of the complainant as “no Claim” and is thus liable to indemnify the complainant to the tune of Rs.33,850/-,(IDV of the motorcycle of Rs.33,950/- - compulsory excess of Rs.100/-), along with interest.

10.              In view of the aforesaid discussion, we allow the present complaint and direct the OP No.1, to pay Rs.33,850/-, alongwith interest @ 4% per annum w.e.f 19.02.2020, i.e the date on which the OP No.1 close the claim file of the complainant as “no Claim”, till its realisation and pay Rs.2,000/-, as litigation expenses. The OP No.1 is further directed to comply with the aforesaid directions within the period of 45 days from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order. Certified copy of the order be supplied to the parties concerned, forthwith, free of cost as permissible under Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the Record Room.

Announced on: 05.07.2022.

 

 

 

          (Vinod Kumar Sharma)            (Ruby Sharma)     (Neena Sandhu)

              Member                                  Member             President

 

 

 

Present:       Shri Narender Kumar Sharma, Advocate, counsel for                                    complainant.

Ms. Priya Sharma, Advocate, counsel for the OP No.1.

                   OP No.2 already given up vide order dated 27.08.2021.

 

Vide our separate detailed order of even date, the present complaint has been allowed. File be consigned to Record Room, after due compliance.

 Announced on: 05.07.2022.

 

 

 

          (Vinod Kumar Sharma)  (Ruby Sharma)               (Neena Sandhu)

              Member                         Member                       President