The complainant Shiweshwar Sah  has filed this complaint petition against Divisional Manager, United  insurance company Ltd.  Muzaffarpur for realization of Rs. 283,500/- total sum assured amount with  9 % interest p.a. from date of theft till realization, Rs. 50,000/- as compensation and Rs. 25,000/- as litigation cost.   

The brief facts of the case is that complainant is   an educated unemployed person and for his livelihood he purchased a Bolero Jeep on    20-02-2016 from Md. Abdullah Shola and Safi Nisha Khan Bearing Registration No. BR-25P6293, Chesis No.- MAIXA 2GHK85L 63099 and engine no.- GHB4L98945. The further case is that owner of the vehicle got insurance policy from o.p no.- 2102003115P109894619 Sum assured Rs. 2,83,500/- and validity of insurance was 30-11-16 to 29-11-2016. The further case is that after purchasing of the vehicle complainant filed an application before DTO for transfer of the ownership after depositing requisite fee by Chalan. The further case is that on 14-03-2016., the driver of the aforesaid vehicle went in (Barat Marriage party) at about 11 PM at Jarhua  Bajar Ram Janki Temple with the vehicle. He parked the vehicle and attended the marriage party. At about 12 in the night, he return but didn’t see the vehicle. The further case is that he lodged an FIR as Hajipur Sadar P.S. Case No. 184/2016 on 15-03-2016. After investigation, police filed final form on 19-05-2016 showing the case true but not clue and Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate Hajipur Vaishali accepted the same on 01-08-2016. The further case is that complainant  filed claim petition before o.p after  fulfilling  all the formalities but on 14-09-2016 o.p repudiated the   claim of the complainant on the ground that insurance policy is not been transferred  after transfer of the owner ship.      

The complainant  has filed the following documents with the complaint petition  photocopy of  policy bond    annexure-1-, photocopy of Insurance certificate annexure-2-, photocopy  of   application for claim by complainant annexure-3-, photocopy of  an application for lodging FIR  annexure-4-, photocopy  of   sale letter annexure-5-, photocopy of   order dated 17-08-2016 annexure-6, photocopy of   FIR Hajipur Sadar P.S. Case No. 184/2016 annexure-7, photocopy of  final form annexure-8, photocopy of information to D.T.O for theft of the vehicle annexure-9, photocopy of  registration certificate in the name of Shiweshwar Sah annexure-9 A.

O.P appeared on 22-01-2019 and filed his w.s. with the prayer  to dismiss the complaint case with cost. The o.p has admitted the fact that the vehicle Bearing Registration No.- BR25P6293 was insured by o.p company through Pvt. Car package policy bearing policy no. 2102003115P109894619, period of insurance valid from 30-11-2015 to 28-11-2016 in the name of Md.  Adullah Shola and  Shafi Nisha  Khan . O.P. has asserted in the w.s. that the complaint petition is not maintainable in the eye of law. He has further mentioned that the petitioner has failed in safeguard  of the vehicle of loss or damage which shows serious negligence  on the part of complainant. He has further  stated that there was no deficiency in service on part of o.p as vehicle was insured under the Pvt. Car package policy but the complainant was using the vehicle for hire on the date of alleged theft   i.e on 14-03-2016 which violated contract of the policy he has further stated  in the w.s. that on 14-03-2016 that is on date of alleged theft, owner book of the vehicle was registered in the D.T.O in the name of Md. Abdullah Shola which was sold on 20-02-2016 but before the theft of the vehicle the complainant has  neither transferred his name in the owner book of the   vehicle nor he has  applied for change his name in the  insurance  policy as  policy holder  of the  vehicle  so the complainant was not owner of the vehicle on 14-03-2016 hence the complainant is not  entitled for any compensation in  this case.

The complainant has examined Shiweshwar Sah             (complainant ) as A.W. 1 and Shankar Sah as Aw. 2 on affidavit.

The o.p company has repudiated the claim of the petitioner on the ground that the policy was issued in the name of Md. Abdullah Shola and Safi Nisha Khan  so under capactioned policy no other person can claim. The claim has also been repudiated on the ground that the original insured has already sold the vehicle but the insurance policy was not transferred, so no claim for the purchaser stand unless it is transferred. The claim of the petition has further been repudiated on the ground that the sold vehicle was sent to D.T.O for transfer only after it was stolen  it is not illegally justified action. 

The complainant Shiweshwar Sha (AW.1) has supported his complaint petition  in his deposition filed on affidavit and  has stated that he purchased the vehicle on 20-02-2016 from Md. Abdulla Shola  and Shafi Nisha. He has further stated that the vehicle in question was insured with the o.p company for sum assured Rs. 2,83,500/- and the insurance was valid since 30-11-2016 to 29-11-2016. He has further stated that he filed a petition before  D.T.O for transfer of the owner  sheep and deposited the fee by

Challan.  On perusal of annexure 9 A it transpires that the vehicle in question was registered on 04-01-2012 in the name of the complainant. The occurrence of theft took place on 14-03-2016 so before the occurrence the complainant was registered  owner and as such he was authorized to entrust the person to ply the vehicle AW-2 Shankar Sha has also supported the application of complaint petition. No evidence has been adduced on behalf of  o.p to counter the above statement of the complainant  and AW-2 Shankar Sah. The vehicle in question was stolen away during the  insured period and the vehicle was transferred in the name of complainant before the occurrence. In the circumstances ,the o.p was liable to indemnify the grievances raised by complainant but he didn’t indemnify the claim of the complainant  and repudiated the same on the ground that the insured  policy was not   transferred  in the name of complainant. It is settled  principle of law that if the claimant is registered owner and the vehicle in question is insurance the o.p will be liable   to indemnify the claim of the claimant. It is irrelevant that the insurance was not transferred in the name of the claimant from the above discussions it transpires  that there is no deficiency in service on the part of o.p and on the basis of the same we are of the considered opinion that the claimant is  entitled to get relief.

In the circumstances the complaint petition is allowed and o.p is directed to pay Rs. 2,83,500/- (sum assured) with     7 %  interest p.a. from the date of filing of the complaint petition, Rs. 20,000/- as compensation  for physical  & mental harassment,  Rs. 10,000/- as litigation cost to the complainant  within two months from the date of order/, on failure to pay the aforesaid amount the o.p shall be liable to pay the same with 9 %  p.a. interest from the date of filing of complaint petition till realization. Let a copy of this order be furnished to both the parties as per rule.