By Sri. Chandran Alachery, Member:

The Complaint is filed under section 12 of the Consumer protection Act for an order directing the Opposite parties to pay an amount of Rs.20,000/- as insured amount covered under policy with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from 24.06.2010 till payment and also to pay Rs.10,000/- as compensation and cost of the proceedings.

2. Complaint in brief :- The Complainant was the owner of Hero Honda Passion Motor Cycle bearing Reg. No. KL12 B 4385 and the same was insured with the second respondent through their agent 1^st Opposite Party. The Insurance Coverage Period is 19.12.2009 to 18.12.2010. While so, on 19.06.2010, the motor cycle was stolen. The matter was informed to the police and police registered crime and the FIR number is 422/10. After investigation, the police filed final report on 17.01.2011 stating that undetected. After that the Complainant filed a claim form to 2^nd Opposite party. The Complainant filed documents like letter stating that the motor cycle was stolen, Motor claim form a copy of the letter addressed to Regional Transport Office, its original receipt, copy of FIR, original insurance certificate, original RC and final report and FIR etc through 1^st Opposite party. The Opposite parties not responded to claim. The Complainant issued legal notice to 2^nd Opposite party, but 2^nd Opposite party not responded. The act of Opposite parties are nothing but deficiency of service and unfair trade practice. Aggrieved by this the complaint is filed.

3. On receipt of this complaint, notices were issued to opposite parties and 1^st Opposite party not appeared before the Forum and 1^st Opposite party is set exparte. 2^nd Opposite party appeared and filed version. In the version of 2^nd Opposite Party, 2^nd Opposite party contended that the Complaint is barred by limitation. The Complainant obtained claim form from 2^nd Opposite party but claim form with all policy records RC, policy and final report in Crime No.422/10 of Mananthavady Police were not submitted to the 2^nd Opposite party. Hence 2^nd Opposite party cannot process the claim.

4. On perusal of complaint, version and documents, the Forum raised the following points for consideration.

1. Whether there is deficiency of service from the part of Opposite parties?

2. Relief and cost.

5. Point No.1:- The Complainant filed proof affidavit and is examined as PW1 and documents are marked as Exts.A1 to A6 and called for documents are marked as Ext.X1 document. 2^nd Opposite Party also filed proof affidavit and is examined as OPW1. On going through Ext.X1 document, it is seen that KL 12B 4385 Motor Cycle is insured with 2^nd Opposite Party and the validity period is from 19.12.2009 to 18.12.2010. The owner of the vehicle is Wilson Paul. As per Ext.A1 documents, the Motor cycle was stolen on 19.06.2010 ie during the validity period. As per Ext.A2 document, the police reported that the motor cycle is undetected. The specific case of 2^nd Opposite Party is that 2^nd Opposite Party did not receive claim form with relevant documents cited above. The Complainant has no case that the relevant documents are submitted to 2^nd Opposite party directly by him. The Complainant stated that the documents are given to 1^st Opposite Party for submitting to 2^nd Opposite party. The Complainant stated that claim form is given to 2^nd Opposite party by him and entrusted documents with 1^st Opposite party. But 1^st Opposite party not submitted it to 2^nd Opposite party for processing. 2^nd Opposite party was ready to give claim if claim form with relevant documents are received to 2^nd Opposite Party. But it was not received from 1^st Opposite party. It is up to 1^st Opposite party to prove that whether he has received relevant documents or not from the Complainant. But 1^st Opposite party is exparte. On perusal of entire evidences, the Forum found that there is deficiency of service from the part of 1^st Opposite Party. If the Complainant or 1^st Opposite party approaches the 2^nd Opposite party for claim, 2^nd Opposite party shall consider the application on merit after condoning the delay and can process accordingly. The Forum found no deficiency of service from the part of 2^nd Opposite party. The Complainant is entitled to get the claim amount. Point No.1 is found accordingly.

6. Point No.2:- Since point No.1 is found in favour of Complainant, the complainant is entitled to get cost and compensation.

In the result, the complaint is partly allowed, and the 1^st Opposite Party is directed to pay Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty thousand) only to the Complainant with 9% interest from 24.06.2010 till payment. 1^st Opposite party is also directed to pay Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One thousand) only as compensation and Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One thousand) only as cost of the proceedings. The 1^st Opposite Party shall comply the order within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order.

Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by him and corrected by me and Pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 9^th day of July 2015.

Date of Filing:19.03.2014.

PRESIDENT :Sd/-

MEMBER :Sd/-

/True Copy/

PRESIDENT, CDRF, WAYANAD.

APPENDIX.

Witness for the complainant:

PW1. Wilson Paul Complainant.

Witness for the Opposite Parties:

Nil.

Exhibits for the complainant:

A1. Copy of First Information Report.

A2. Copy of Final Report.

A3. Copy of Letter. dt:21.06.2010.

A4. Copy of Motor claim Form dt:22.06.2010.

A5. Copy of Letter. dt:24.06.2010.

A6. Copy of Notice. dt;03.05.2012

Exhibits for the Opposite Parties.

X1. Motor Cycle/ Scooter Package Policy