Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rohtak.
Complaint No. : 650
Instituted on : 29.10.2021
Decided on : 04.05.2023.
Sidharth age 28 years, son of Raj Kumar resident of 38 Purana ward 23, Tirkha Colony, Faridabad(Haryana)-121001 now at present VPO Ismaila 11-B, Tehsil ampla Distt. Rohtak(Haryana).
.......................Complainant.
Vs.
- Universal Sompo General Insurance Ltd., 4th Floor, Plot No.149, Sector 44, near Punjab and Sindh Bank, Gurugram-122003, through its Manager.
- Universal Sompo General Insurance Ltd., Unit no.601-602, 6th Floor, Rliable Tech park, Cloud City Campus, gate no.31, Mouju Eltam, Thane, Belapur Road, Airoli, New Mumbai, 400708, service be effected through Managing Director/Manager.
……….Opposite parties
COMPLAINT U/S 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986.
BEFORE: SH.NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT.
DR.TRIPTI PANNU, MEMBER
DR. VIJENDER SINGH, MEMBER
Present: Sh.Sandeep Kaushik, Advocate for the complainant.
Sh. Puneet Chahal, Advocate for the opposite parties.
ORDER
NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT:
1. Brief facts of the case as per complainant are that he is registered owner of Vehicle-CRUZE bearing No. HR-26-BU-1440 and the same was duly got insured with the opposite parties vide policy no.USGI/2311/59357349/00/000 for the period from 21.01.2019 to 20.01.2020. The I.D.V. of the said vehicle was Rs.923000/-. The aforesaid vehicle of the complainant was got stolen on 15.11.2019. Complainant immediately informed the police and when the said vehicle was not traced out then FIR No.529 dated 15.11.2019 u/s 379 IPC was got registered in PS SGM Nagar, Faridabad. The complainant had immediately intimated to the officials of the opposite parties about the theft of said vehicle and submitted all the required documents and completed all the required formalities alongwith un-trace report, key etc., as required by the official of respondents for disbursement of the claim amount of said vehicle. Complainant contacted Sunil Kumar Jha, Vikas and Manoj Jha i.e. officials of the respondents on their mobile regarding the claim of said vehicle. Complainant also visited the office of respondents at Gurugram personally and requested the opposite parties to disburse the genuine claim amount but despite his repeated requests and personal visits, claim amount has not been paid by the opposite parties. Lastly respondents disclosed that the claim file of the complainant has been closed by the respondents. The act and conduct of the opposite parties is illegal and amounts to deficiency in service. Hence this complaint and it is prayed that opposite parties may kindly be directed to pay the claim amount of Rs.923000/- alongwith interest, compensation and litigation expenses to the complainant as explained in relief clause.
2. After registration of complaint, notices were issued to the opposite parties. Opposite parties in their reply has submitted that complainant has not intimated to the respondent company immediately for conducting the spot survey. The alleged theft/loss occurred on 15.11.2019, whereas intimation for theft of vehicle/loss to the respondent company informed on 18.11.2019 i.e. delay of 03 days. The delay in intimation has denied the respondents of their right to conduct spot survey and properly verify the veracity of the claim. It is also submitted that opposite party had appointed a surveyor to investigate and assess the amount loss. Opposite parties also sent letter dated 04.02.2021 to the complainant and required some documents but the complainant did not submit/clarify all requirements. As such the opposite parties regret inability to proceed further in the matter and as the claim cannot be kept open indefinitely, the opposite parties were compelled to proceed with the closure of the said file as No Claim and the opposite party company intimated the complainant vide letter dated 18.09.2021. Hence the answering respondents are not liable to pay any claim and had repudiated the claim on genuine grounds. All the other contents of the complaint were stated to be wrong and denied and opposite parties prayed for dismissal of complaint with costs.
3. Learned counsel for the complainant in his evidence has tendered affidavits Ex.CW1/A, documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C10 and has closed his evidence on dated 27.04.2022. Learned counsel for the opposite parties tendered affidavit Ex. RW1/A, documents Ex. R1 to Ex. R3 and closed his evidence on 09.06.2022.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through material aspects of the case very carefully.
5. In the present case, the claim of the complainant has been repudiated by the insurance company on the ground that there was delay of 03 days in giving intimation to the opposite parties about the theft and the requisite documents were not submitted by the complainant despite their repeated requests. To prove the same opposite parties have placed on record copies of letter Ex.R2 and Ex.R3. We have observed the affidavit and written statement filed by the opposite parties, in which so many documents have been demanded from the complainant. On the other hand, as per complaint and affidavit filed by the complainant, he has submitted all the documents with the respondents. It is also observed that the vehicle in question was got stolen on 15.11.2019 and the FIR was lodged on the same day i.e. 15.11.2019, which is proved from the copy of FIR Ex.C4. But the opposite parties in para no.5 of preliminary objections of their written statement has taken the ground that there was delay of 3 days in giving intimation to the opposite parties regarding the theft and the same is violation of terms and condition No.1 of the policy. Regarding the delayed intimation to the company, we have placed reliance upon the law of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Civil Appeal no.1069 of 2022 decided on 11.02.2022 titled as Jaina Construction Company Vs. Oriental Insurance Company, Civil Appeal no.5705 of 2021 decided on 13.09.2021 in case titled as Dharamender Vs. UIIC, as well as Civil Appeal no.653 of 2020 decided on 24.01.2020 in case titled as Gurshinder Singh Vs. Shriram General Insurance Co. Ltd. & Anr., Hon’ble Apex Court has observed that: “When insured lodged FIR immediately after theft of a vehicle occurred and when police after investigation have lodged a final report after vehicle was not traced and when surveyors/investigators appointed by insurance company found claim of theft to be genuine, then mere delay in intimating insurance company about occurrence of theft cannot be a ground to deny claim-Lodging of FIR on same day theft occurred-Therefore, denial of claim set aside”. The law cited above, are fully applicable on the facts and circumstances of the case as in the present case also, FIR was lodged on the same day of theft. Hence the repudiation of the claim by the opposite parties is illegal and amounts to deficiency in service. As such opposite parties are liable to pay the IDV of the vehicle to the complainant. As per cover note Ex.R1, the IDV of the vehicle is Rs.923000/-.
6. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case we hereby allow the complaint and direct the opposite parties to pay Rs.923000/-(Rupees nine lac twenty three thousand only) alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing the present complaint i.e. 29.10.2021 till its realization and shall also pay Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand only) as compensation on account of deficiency in service and Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand only) as litigation expenses to the complainant within one month from the date of decision. However complainant is directed to complete the formalities i.e. to submit the signed form no.29-30, indemnity bond and subrogation letter in favour of the company within 15 days from today and thereafter opposite party shall comply with the order dated 04.05.2023 of this Commission. Complainant is also directed to send a letter to the RTO for cancellation of R.C.
7. Copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced in open court:
04.05.2023.
.....................................................
Nagender Singh Kadian, President
............................................
Tripti Pannu, Member
……………………………….
Vijender Singh, Member
