Advocate Milind Malve for the Complainant
Advocate R. R. Ganu for the Opponent
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
Per Hon’ble Shri. V. P. Utpat, President
:- JUDGMENT :-
Date – 12th March 2013
This complaint is filed by the owner of Tavera four wheeler against the Insurance Company. Brief facts are as follows-
[1] The complainant has purchased Chevrolet Tavera four wheeler which was insured with the Opponent for Rs.4,80,000/-. Annual premium of the said insurance was Rs.21,700/-. He had insured the said vehicle for the period of 29/4/2009 to 28/4/2010.
[2] On 01/05/2009 he had parked his vehicle at Hadapsar, Pune. It was properly locked. But somebody has stolen the said vehicle. He lodged F.I.R. immediately in Hadapsar police station. The F.I.R. number is 293/2009. After lodging the F.I.R. complainant approached the opponent and submitted all the original documents and indemnity bond. He had also issued notice to the opponent through Advocate and claimed the insurance amount. On 5/11/2009 he made inquiry about his claim. At that time the office bearer of the opponent insisted him to settle the claim for Rs.3,50,000/-. He had sustained mental loss due to repudiation of claim. He has claimed insurance claim of Rs.4,80,000/- and compensation for delay in settlement of the claim.
[3] The claim is resisted by the opponent by filing written version. The facts as regards insuring the vehicle in dispute is not disputed by the opponent. But it reveals from the written version that the company has offered Rs.3,80,000/- instead of IDV Rs.4,80,000/-. But the complainant was not ready for the compromise. The rest of the facts are denied by the Insurance Company and it has prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
[4] After scrutinizing the documentary evidence which is produced on record by both the parties, considering the affidavits as well as hearing argument of both counsels, following points arise for my determination. The points, findings and reasons thereon are as follows-
Sr.No. | POINTS | FINDINGS |
1 | Whether the complainant has proved that the opponent has caused deficiency in service by repudiating his claim ? | In the Affirmative |
2 | What order ? | Complaint is allowed. |
REASONS-
Undisputed facts in the present proceedings are that the vehicle which was stolen is belonging to the complainant and the same was insured with the opponent for the period 29/4/2009 to 28/4/2010. It is also not in dispute that the said vehicle was stolen on 01/05/2009. The report of Investigator which is filed on behalf of the opponent is supporting the contention of the complainant. The Insurance Policy which is produced on behalf of the opponent is also disclosing that value of the insured vehicle on the date of policy was Rs.4,80,000/-. It is not in dispute that the complainant has paid the premium as per the demand. It is significant to note that the vehicle was insured with the opponent on 29/4/2009 and it was stolen on 01/05/2009 i.e. within two days from the date of insurance. In such circumstances there is no scope of considering the depreciation of the vehicle as the Company itself has valued the said vehicle for Rs.4,80,000/-. In this circumstances there is no question of settlement between the parties for adjudicating the claim for Rs.3,50,000/-. Insurance Company has not raised any other defence than the said defence. It reveals from the record that the claim is not accepted by the Insurance Company promptly and delay was caused in the Insurance Company. In this circumstances the complainant is entitled for the recovery of claim amount as well as compensation and costs of the proceeding.
I answer the points accordingly and pass the following order-
:- ORDER :-
1. The complaint is allowed.
2. It is hereby declared that the opponent has caused deficiency in service by repudiating the legitimate claim of the complainant.
3. The Complainant is entitled to recover Rs.4,80,000/- alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing of complaint i.e. 29/10/2010 till its realization within six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of order by the opponents.
4. The Complainant is also entitled to get Rs.5,000/- by way of compensation and costs of the proceeding from the Opponent within six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of order by the opponents.
Copy of order be supplied to both the parties free of cost.
Place-Pune
Date- 12/03/2013
