BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SIRSA.

                                                          Consumer Complaint no. 161 of 2014.                                                                       

                                                            Date of Institution         :    20.11.2014

                                                          Date of Decision   :  11.1.2017.

Gourav aged about 25 years son of Sh. Kewal Krishan, resident of House No.381, Grewal Basti Begu road, Tehsil & Distt. Sirsa.

            ….Complainant.                     

                   Versus

1. United India Insurance Company Limited Sirsa through its Divisional Manager (Insurer of Vehicle No. HR24N 9050 Model 2011, vide policy Number 111987/31/13/01/00001188 w.e.f 30.5.2013 till 30.5.2014.

                                                                             ..…Opposite party.

            Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986.

Before:        SHRI S.B.LOHIA………………………………..PRESIDENT

                   SHRI RANBIR SINGH PANGHAL ……….……MEMBER.

Present:       Sh. Sandeep Midha,  Advocate for the complainant.

        Sh. A.S.Kalra, Advocate for opposite party.

ORDER

                   Case of complainant, in brief, is that he was registered owner of Motor cycle No. HR 24N 9050 Model 2011, make Bajaj Pulsar, 150 cc and said motor cycle was insured with opposite party with effect from 30.5.2013 to 30.5.2014. On 28.3.2014, complainant parked his motor cycle out of his shop and at about 11.00 p.m. when complainant had to go to his house, he found that motor cycle was missing and was stolen by some person. He searched for his motor cycle but in vain. Then he reported the matter to the Police and a case FIR No.319 dated 29.3.2014 under Section 379 IPC was registered in police station city Sirsa. The insurance company was also simultaneously informed and it assured him to compensate the loss of motor cycle. The police also inquired the matter and untraced report was written on 30.5.2014. After sometime, Ranjeet Kumar @ Kalu son of Mann Singh was arrested by the police in above said case and parts of motor cycle were recovered from him. The complainant has been approaching the opposite party time and again in respect of claim of the insured motor cycle but to no effect and now the ops have repudiated his claim. Hence, this complaint.

2.                On notice, opposite party appeared and while taking certain preliminary objections in its reply has submitted that complaint is pre-mature as the claim of the complainant has not yet been finalized and decided by op for want of required information/ documents viz. claim forms, ownership proof of the alleged stolen vehicle and other relevant documents as well as untraced report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. duly accepted by the competent court which is also necessary and required for processing of the claim as per contract of insurance but complainant instead of submitting the required information/documents to answering op has preferred this complaint. Besides above, the stolen vehicle has been recovered by the Police as mentioned by complainant himself but complainant neither informed the company about the same nor afforded any opportunity to company for survey or inspection by the Surveyor for processing the claim. It has been further submitted that theft of vehicle took place on 28.3.2014 but intimation to op was given on 1.4.2014 i.e. after about three days of occurrence of theft and complainant has also violated the terms and conditions of policy.

3.                By way of evidence, complainant has produced his affidavit Ex.C1, copy of FIR Ex.C2, copy of registration certificate Ex.C3, copy of judicial remand application Ex.C4, legal notice Ex.C5, postal receipt Ex.C6, acknowledgment Ex.C7 and insurance policy Ex.C8. On the other hand, opposite party has produced affidavit Ex.R1, copy of application Ex.R2, copy of motor claim intimation letter Ex.R3, copy of legal notice Ex.R4, reply to legal notice Ex.R5, copy of remand application Ex.R6, copy of FIR Ex.R7 and copy of insurance policy Ex.R8.

4.                We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the case file carefully.

5.                The main plea of the opposite party is that complaint is pre-mature as the claim of the complainant has not yet been finalized and decided by op for want of required information/ documents viz. claim forms, ownership proof of the alleged stolen vehicle and other relevant documents as well as untraced report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. duly accepted by the competent court which is also necessary and required for processing of the claim as per contract of insurance. In reply to the legal notice served upon opposite party by complainant, op also submitted that claim is proceeded further after receipt of information. The opposite party has not repudiated/ decided the claim of the complainant so far for want of above said documents. In these circumstances, the opposite party is directed to settle/ decide the claim of the complainant within one month after required information/ documents submitted by the complainant. The present complaint stands disposed of accordingly. Copy of this order be given to the parties as per rules. File be consigned to record room after due compliance.

Announced in open Forum.                                  President,

Dated: 11.1.2017.                                          District Consumer Disputes

                                                                       Redressal Forum, Sirsa.

                             Member.