Complainant Naveen Mahajan vide the present complaint filed U/S 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter for short The Act) for issuance of the necessary directions to the opposite party to release the insurance claim amount in his favour on account of stolen vehicle and also to pay compensation alongwith litigation expenses Rs.20,000/- on account of mental and physical harassment suffered by him, in the interest of justice.

2.          The case of the complainant in brief is that he purchased vehicle i.e. Santro Car bearing Chassis No.51 HR-7M-168059, Engine No.G4 HG7M-208977 Model 2007 bearing registration No.PB-06-G-8687 for personal use and occupation. He time to time got insured his vehicle from the opposite party. In the year 2011, he again insured his above mentioned vehicle from the opposite party for the period from 10.9.2011 to 9.9.2012 and for taking the said insurance policy; he has paid an amount of Rs.5639/- as premium to the opposite party. He has further pleaded that unfortunately, his vehicle was stolen on 16.7.2012 from the street which leads to his house. Thereafter, he tried his level best to trace out the vehicle but of no use. Immediately he reported the matter to the Police of Police Station Dinanagar and the F.I.R. bearing No.151 dated 18.7.2012 U/S 379 I.P.C. was registered and also informed to the opposite party but they replied that firstly he should got register an F.I.R. in this regard and other formalities. Thereafter he started approaching the opposite party and made written request to the opposite party regularly. The opposite party issued registered letter to him and asked him to complete the formalities. He has completed all the requisite formalities and submitted all the requisite documents alongwith copy of F.I.R. as per instructions of the opposite party before the opposite party in compliance of the Letter dated 6.12.2013. The original policy of the vehicle was also handed over to the opposite party which is still in the possession of the opposite party but instead of that the opposite party always procrastinating the matter pending with one pretext or the other. Thereafter the opposite party started demanding No traceable report of the vehicle from him. He has approached to the Police and ultimately the Police have issued Non Traceable Certificate to him which was submitted to the opposite party and they assured that the claim has been sent to the Head Office and as and when his claim would be passed, he will be intimated about this. To his utter surprise the opposite party has repudiated his claim vide its letter dated 17.4.2015 by alleging that his case was very old and he has not submitted the requisite documents before them. This fact is wrong and illegal infact he has submitted the entire documents with the opposite party. He has repeatedly been visiting the office of the opposite party with the request to release insurance claim in his favour but all in vain. Thus there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. Hence this complaint.

3.         Upon notice, the opposite party insurer appeared through its counsel and filed its written version taking the preliminary objections that the complaint filed by the complainant is not maintainable as the complainant has filed this complaint against the terms and conditions of the Insurance Policy. The complainant informed the opposite party after 8 days of the alleged theft which is against the terms and conditions of the Insurance Policy. As by delaying the information of theft to the opposite party, the insured had acted against the interest of insurance company and this violation of condition is fundamental to the loss caused. Therefore, the opposite party cannot be held liable to pay any insurable benefit in respect of alleged theft of vehicle; the complaint is hopelessly time barred under Section 24-A of the Act and the present complaint is entirely based on false and frivolous averments and the complaint is without any cause of action, hence liable to be dismissed. On merits, it was submitted that after receiving intimation from the complainant the opposite party has appointed S.A. Investigation and Consulting Agency Pathankot and to submit his report on 20.01.2013. Thereafter the opposite party written a letter dated 8.2.2013 requested him to comply with the formalities reflected in the letter. But the complainant did not respond the letter. Thereafter the opposite party has written four registered reminders vide various letters dated on 02.9.2013, 27.09.2013, 6.12.2013 and 17.4.2015 to complainant regarding submission of required documents as per terms and conditions of policy. But the complainant did not respond to abovementioned reminders and failed to submit the required documents to the opposite party. After fourth reminder the opposite party closed the file of the complainant as NO CLAIM on 12.03.2014. The claim of complainant declared NO CLAIM by the competent authority for non submission of required documents by the complainant. All other averments made in the complaint has been vehemently denied and lastly prayed that the complaint may be dismissed with costs.

4.           Complainant tendered into evidence his own affidavit Ex.CI  and of Vijay Kumar Ex.C2 along with the other documents exhibited as Ex. C3 to Ex C12 and closed the evidence.

5.         On the other hand, Sh.Anil Mahajan D.O. of opposite party tendered into evidence his own affidavit Ex.OP1, alongwith the other documents Ex.OP2 to Ex.OP7 and closed the evidence.

6.        From the pleadings and evidence on record we find that the present complaint is premature since the opposite party vide letter Ex.OP7 dt.17.4.2015 has not yet finally decided the insurance claim as to the loss of vehicle and closed the file of the complainant as NO CLAIM on 12.3.2014 and have rather sought certain documents/information from the complainant which the complainant is bound to supply. Thus we dispose of the complaint and direct the complainant to approach the opposite party and submit the requisite documents/information desired by them for settling the insurance claim within 15 days of the receipt of these orders and further direct the opposite party insurance providers to decide the claim as per the terms and conditions of the policy within 15 days of the receipt of documents from the complainant. The opposite party is further directed to decide insurance claim duly filed by the complainants duly verified as per the settled procedure laid down by their regulating Agency IRDA.

7.       Copy of the order be communicated to the parties free of charges. After compliance, file be consigned.                                                                                                                                                              

                                                                            (Naveen Puri)

                                                                                     President   

Announced:                                                          (Jagdeep Kaur)

November 06, 2015                                                         Member

*MK*