Complainant Hardip Singh 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 titled opposite parties to pay Rs.14,00,000/-  i.e. the IDV value of the vehicle alongwith interest @ 12% P.A. from the date of filing the complaint. Opposite parties no.1 and 2 be further directed to pay Rs.30,000/- for deficiency in service  and Rs.20,000/- for physical and mental harassment, in the interest of justice.

2.       The case of the complainant in brief is that he was owner of vehicle having registration no.PB-32-L-3895. He was using the vehicle to earn his livelihood and except this he was not having any other source of earning his livelihood. He got insured his abovesaid vehicle from the opposite parties and policy having 1111043113P102500629 has been issued and the vehicle was insured with the opposite parties for a period from 19.7.2013 to 18.7.2014 and the IDV value has been declared as 14 lacs. The insurance has been taken not for any benefit but only for indemnify the loss if any occurred and as such the complaint falls under the definition of consumer as provided under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. He has further pleaded that the vehicle was under Hypothecation with Indus IND Bank Ltd, Pathankot and he had purchased the vehicle after getting loan from the opposite party no.3. His vehicle was stolen at the night time on 9/10-11-2013.The FIR has been duly registered on 10.11.2013 Under Section 379 IPC at P.S.Tibber District Gurdaspur in the area of which the vehicle was stolen.  Intimation was given to the Insurance Company. FIR and other documents were also given to the opposite parties. After that the Untraced Report duly attested by P.S. Tibber, Gurdaspur has been duly provided to the Insurance Company. As such all the formalities have been duly completed but in spite of all this, the claim has not been paid by the opposite parties without any reasonable cause.  He approached to the office of opposite party no.1 many times to get his claim amount but the opposite parties are not paying the genuine claim  and are making false excuses. A legal notice dated 24.7.2014 through registered post was also served upon the opposite parties but even then neither any reply has been sent nor the claim has been paid to him. Thus there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. Hence this complaint.

3.       Upon notice, the opposite party insurer appeared through their counsel and filed their joint written version taking the preliminary objections that the present complaint is hopelessly pre-mature as the complainant has lodged his claim with the opposite party but no requisite documents were supplied by the complainant to the opposite party. It was submitted that for considering the claim of the complainant, the Untraceable Report of the stolen vehicle duly issued by Illaqa Magistrate, N.C.R.B. Report, Registration Certificate and both Keys of the stolen vehicle are very much essential, but the complainant after lodging his theft claim with the insurance company, did not supply the abovesaid documents to the opposite parties despite the repeated requests and letters. Due to non-filing of the requisite documents, the insurance company is not in a position to settle the claim, hence, the claim is still under process and has not been repudiated. As soon as, the Insurance Company received information of loss to insured vehicle in question, due to the alleged theft, the Insurance Company deputed Investigator S.A. Investigation Agency for investigation of the Factum of theft and for securitization of the documents of the complainant, but the said Investigator could not investigate the matter due to non-supplying of the abovesaid requisite documents to the said Investigator, hence, the matter is still under process and the claim has not been repudiated. Hence, due to non-supplying the documents by the complainant, the insurance company is not in a position to settle the claim under the terms and conditions of the policy. Hence, the present claim of the complainant is liable to be dismissed on this score only.  On merits, it was submitted that the complainant has lodged his claim with the opposite party with the F.I.R. registered on 10.11.2013, but it was denied that the complainant has supplied all the requisite documents to the opposite party. Under the terms and conditions of the policy in question, the Untraceable Report duly issued by the Illaqa Magistrate is very much essential document to settle the claim, but the untraceable report supplied by the complainant is issued by the Police Station, which is not acceptable under the provisions of law. As soon as, the Insurance Company received information of loss to insured vehicle in question due to the alleged theft, the Insurance Company deputed Investigator S.A. Investigation Agency for investigation of the Factum of theft and for securitization of the documents of the complainant, but the said Investigator could not investigate the matter due to non-supplying the abovesaid requisite documents to the said Investigator, hence, the matter is still under process and the claim has not been repudiated. All other contents of the present complaint have been denied by the opposite party and lastly, the complaint has been prayed to be dismissed with costs .

4.       Complainant tendered into evidence his affidavit Ex.C1, along with the other documents exhibited as Ex. C2 to Ex.C8 and closed the evidence.

5.        Sh.Satish Sharma, Assistant Manager of the opposite party tendered into evidence his own affidavit Ex.OP1 and closed the evidence.

6.      Sh.Neeraj Gautam, Branch Manger of opposite party no.3 tendered into evidence his own affidavit Ex.OP3/1, alongwith other documents Ex.OP3/2 to Ex.OP-3/4 and closed the evidence.

7.     We have carefully gone through the pleadings of both the parties; arguments advanced by their respective counsels and have also appreciated the evidence produced on record with the valuable assistance of the learned counsels for the purposes of adjudication of the present complaint.

8.      We find that the present complaint is premature since the opposite party vide letter Ex.C3 dt.20.10.2014 has yet not finally decided the insurance claim as to the loss of vehicle 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.

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

         (Naveen Puri)

                                                                             President   

Announced:                                                   (Jagdeep Kaur)

September 10, 2015                                                Member

*MK*