DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BARNALA, PUNJAB.
Complaint Case No : 45/2015
Date of Institution : 09.03.2015
Date of Decision : 18.06.2015
Rajinder Kumar S/o Raj Kumar R/o Gali No. 1, Near Diwan Deport, Tapa, District Barnala.
…Complainant
Versus
United India Insurance Company Ltd., Khati Bazar, Rampuraphul, Bathinda, through its Branch Manager.
…Opposite Party
Complaint Under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
Present: Sh. R.K Singla Advocate counsel for the complainant.
Sh. S.M. Gupta Advocate counsel for the opposite party.
Quorum.-
1. Shri S.K. Goel : President.
2. Sh. Karnail Singh : Member
3. Ms. Vandna Sidhu : Member
ORDER
(SHRI S.K. GOEL PRESIDENT):
The complainant namely Rajinder Kumar has filed the complaint under Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter called as Act) against United India Insurance Company (hereinafter called as opposite party).
2. The facts emerging from the present complaint are that the complainant purchased one Platina motor cycle bearing registration No. PB-19-G-9362 and purchased insurance policy of the opposite party for the period 11.10.2012 to 10.10.2013. Thereafter, the complainant got renewed the said insurance policy from 11.10.2013 to 10.10.2014 and at the time of renewal of the policy the opposite party assessed the value of said motor cycle to the tune of Rs. 32,000/-.
3. It is alleged that on 25.1.2014 the complainant parked his motor cycle near Municipal Council Office Tapa and locked the same properly. The said motor cycle was stolen by someone and the complainant immediately informed the opposite party. The complainant tried his best to search the same, but all in vain. Thereafter, the complainant lodged an FIR No. 23/2014 with the Police Station Tapa and the Police Station Tapa issued Non Traceable Certificate dated 14.8.2014 to the complainant. It is further pleaded that the complainant supplied all the desired documents and Non Traceable Certificate to the opposite party and requested for the settlement of claim and visited the office of the opposite party many a times, but all in vain. Thus, the act of the opposite party not only deficiency in service, but also unfair trade practice. Hence, the present complaint is filed seeking the following reliefs.
To pay Rs. 32,000/- i.e. sum assured alongwith interest @ 18% per annum from the date of theft till realization.
To pay Rs. 50,000/- as compensation.
To pay Rs. 5,500/- as litigation expenses.
4. Upon notice of this complaint, the opposite party appeared through Counsel and filed written version taking legal objections on the grounds of premature, delay in lodging FIR, concealment of material facts, complainant is not a consumer and maintainability. On merits, the opposite party submitted that the opposite party has issued policy bearing No. 2004043113P104385667, which was valid from 11.10.2013 to 10.10.2014. However, the opposite party submitted that the FIR was lodged after the gap of about two months and there is no explanation for this lapse. It is further submitted that the claim of the complainant is under process and due to some technical formalities, the opposite party will take some time. However, they have denied any deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on their part and prayed for the dismissal of complaint.
5. In order to prove his case, the complainant tendered into evidence his own affidavit Ex.C-1, copy of insurance policy Ex.C-2, copy of RC Ex.C-3, copy of letter dated 26.1.2014 Ex.C-4, copy of FIR Ex.C-5, copy of letter dated 12.8.2014 Ex.C-6, copy of report dated 14.8.2014 Ex.C-7, copy of letter dated 12.1.2015 Ex.C-8, copy of letter dated 15.1.2015 Ex.C-9 and closed his evidence.
6. To rebut the case of the complainant the opposite party tendered into evidence affidavit of Suresh Kumar Branch Manager Ex.O.P1 and closed the evidence.
7. In order to prove his case the complainant has tendered into evidence his affidavit Ex.C-1, wherein he specifically stated that on 25.1.2014 his motor cycle was stolen by someone and he also reiterated his stand as taken in the complaint. Ex.C-2 is the copy of policy showing that the vehicle was insured from 11.10.2013 to 10.10.2014. The theft took place on 25.1.2014, therefore the case of the complainant is covered by the policy Ex.C-2. Ex.C-3 is the certificate of registration in favour of the complainant. Ex.C-4 is the copy of FIR, which shows the date of theft of vehicle in question i.e. 25.1.2014. Ex.C-6 is the report of the Police Station Tapa, showing that the said vehicle was not recovered till today.
8. On the other hand the opposite party has not placed on record any document to rebut the fact of theft. Facing the situation, the Ld. Counsel for the opposite party has unsuccessfully contended that the FIR was recorded after two months and the delay is not explained. This contention is untenable. Perusal of the affidavit of the complainant shows that he immediately informed the opposite party regarding the theft of his motor cycle. Moreover, there is nothing on record to show as why the opposite party failed to appoint an Investigator/Surveyor to prove the factum of theft.
9. In view of the above discussion we are of the view that the complainant is successful in proving that the vehicle in question was stolen and the same was insured with the opposite party, therefore the present complaint is accepted against the opposite party and complainant is entitled to Rs. 32,000/- alongwith interest @ 6% per annum from the date of theft till realization. The complainant is also entitled to Rs. 2,000/- as compensation and Rs. 2,100/- as litigation expenses from the opposite party. It is also worth mentioning here that the complainant will execute all the documents in favour of the opposite party regarding the relinquishment from the ownership of the vehicle. This order of ours shall be complied within 45 days from the date of the receipt of this order. Copy of this order be supplied to the parties free of costs. The file after its due completion be consigned to the records.
ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN FORUM:
18th Day of June, 2015.
(S.K. Goel)
President.
I do agree.
(Karnail Singh)
Member.
(Vandna Sidhu)
Member.
