Kerala

Malappuram

CC/10/90

VIKAS .K (25 Yrs), S/O. VIJAYAN .K - Complainant(s)

Versus

UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. - Opp.Party(s)

17 Feb 2011

ORDER

CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
MALAPPURAM
 
Complaint Case No. CC/10/90
 
1. VIKAS .K (25 Yrs), S/O. VIJAYAN .K
KARINGAPPADI,KOTTAKUNNU
MALAPPURAM
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.
BRANCH OFFICE KILIYAMANNIL MALAPPURAM,UPHILL
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HONOURABLE MRS. C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI PRESIDENT
 HONOURABLE MS. E. AYISHAKUTTY Member
 HONOURABLE MR. MOHAMMED MUSTAFA KOOTHRADAN Member
 
PRESENT:
 
ORDER

 

By Smt. C. S. Sulekha Beevi, President,


 


 

1. Complainant is the owner of KL-9-K 208 Bajaj Boxer motorcycle. The vehicle was insured with opposite party. On 24-9-2008 the vehicle was parked in the premises of the house of his friend Ilyas as the complainant happened to stay there overnight. In the morning of 25-9-2008 the vehicle was found missing. He instructed his friend to inform the police. Later he came to know that a complaint has not been registered by the police. Thereafter he preferred a complaint before the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Malappuram and upon this, the policy registered the case as Crime No.79/09 under sec.379 IPC. After investigation police has referred the case as undetected and the vehicle was not recovered. Complainant preferred a claim before opposite party. But this was repudiated raising the contention that the crime regarding the theft was registered only after three months. Complainant alleges deficiency in service. Hence this complaint.

     

2. Opposite party filed version admitting the insurance policy issued to the vehicle. It is stated that even though the theft occurred on 25-9-2008, the complainant did not file any written complaint before police. That the complainant put forth a private complaint before the Judicial First Class Magistrate after a delay of 3 months. That this shows that the alleged theft is not genuine. That complainant did not report the theft to opposite party. Further complainant did not produce documents necessary to process the claim. That the IDV of the vehicle during the relevant period is Rs.16,000/- and the claim of the complainant for Rs.22,000/- is baseless. That there is no deficiency in service.

     

3. Evidence consists of the proof affidavit filed by complainant and Exts.A1 to A4 marked for him. Opposite party filed counter affidavit and Ext.B1 marked for opposite party.

     

4. Opposite party has repudiated the claim on the ground that there is a delay in reporting the theft to the police and therefore suspecting the genuineness of theft of vehicle. Ext.A3 is the certified copy of the First Information Report registered by Malappuram police on receiving a private complaint lodged by the complainant through the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Malappuram. Ext.A4 is the Final Report submitted by the police in the above case which was registered under sec.379 IPC. It is stated in Ext.A4 that even after investigation the police could not arrest the accused or recover the vehicle. The case is thus reported as undetected. The police is the investigative agency under the law of our land. The complainant has moved a complaint and the investigative force has conducted an investigation. On such circumstances there is no reason for opposite party to disbelieve Ext.A3 and Ext.A4 and deny the claim of the complainant. It is seen that opposite party has denied the claim without justifiable grounds. Denial of claim without valid ground is deficiency. We find opposite party deficient.

     

5. Complainant prays for Rs.22,000/- towards loss of vehicle. Ext.A2 is the certificate of insurance which shows that the IDV of the vehicle is Rs.16,000/-. We hold that complainant is entitled to this amount along with interest @ 9% per annum from date of complaint till payment together with costs of Rs.1,000/-.

     

6. In the result we partly allow the complaint and order opposite party to pay Rs.16,000/- (Rupees Sixteen thousand only) to the complainant along with interest @ 9% per annum from date of complaint till payment together with costs of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One thousand only) within one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

     

    Dated this 17th day of February, 2011.


 


 

 

Sd/-

C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI, PRESIDENT


 


 

 

Sd/-

MOHAMMED MUSTAFA KOOTHRADAN, Sd/-

MEMBER E. AYISHAKUTTY, MEMBER


 


 


 


 


 


 


 

APPENDIX


 


 

Witness examined on the side of the complainant : Nil

Documents marked on the side of the complainant : Ext.A1 to A4

Ext.A1 : True photo copy of the Certificate of Registration in respect of vehicle

No.KL-09-J-208

Ext.A2 : Photo copy of the Certificate of Insurance of Motorcycle/Scooter

issued by opposite party to complainant.

Ext.A3 : Photo copy of the First Information Report dated, 22-01-2009 prepared by Sri.T.P.Sivadasan, Head Clerk, Malappuram Police Station.

Ext.A4 : Photo copy of the Final report dated, 30-4-2009 prepared by Sri.T.Manoharan, S.I. of Police, Malappuram

Witness examined on the side of the opposite parties : Nil

Documents marked on the side of the opposite parties : Ext.B1

Ext.B1 : Certificate of Insurance of Motorcycle/Scooter issued by opposite party to complainant.


 


 

 

Sd/-

C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI, PRESIDENT


 


 

 

Sd/-

MOHAMMED MUSTAFA KOOTHRADAN, Sd/-

MEMBER E. AYISHAKUTTY, MEMBER


 


 

 
 
[HONOURABLE MRS. C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI]
PRESIDENT
 
[HONOURABLE MS. E. AYISHAKUTTY]
Member
 
[HONOURABLE MR. MOHAMMED MUSTAFA KOOTHRADAN]
Member

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.