District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission ,Faridabad.

Consumer Complaint  No.326/2021.

 Date of Institution: 08.07.2021.

Date of Order: 21.11.2022.

Birender Singh aged about 46 years son of Shri Kishan Singh resident of house No. 181, Mohalla Jakhar, Village Mujesar, P.O. Sector-22, Faridabad. Aadhar card No. 9868 1160 3574, Mobile No. 9999255717.

                                                                   …….Complainant……..

                                                Versus

M/s. United India Insurance Company Limited, SCO-106, Commercial Complex, Green Channel Road, Sector-16, Faridabad, through its Divisional Manager/Principal Officer.

                                                                   …Opposite party……

Complaint under section-12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986

Now  amended  Section 34 of Consumer protection Act 2019.

BEFORE:            Amit Arora……………..President

Mukesh Sharma…………Member.

Indira Bhadana………….Member.

PRESENT:                   Sh.  R.S.Jakhar,  counsel for the complainant.

                             Sh. Bharat Garg, counsel for opposite party.

ORDER:  

                   The facts in brief of the complaint are that  the complainant was registered owner of Hero Spender  Motorcycle bearing its registration NO. HR-29-AM-6425, having its engine No. HA10EWGHB62840, Chasis No. MBLHA10BWGHB09135, model 2016, who got insured his above said vehicle with the opposite party vide insurance policy NO.2221003119P102154879  valid from 15.05.2019 to midnight of 14.05.2020 for a total sum of Rs.29,000/- covering the risk of theft etc. and for which the complainant paid a sum of Rs.1498/- as premium to the opposite party. On 05.11.2019 the son of the complainant namely Gaurav Jakhar went alongwith above said motorcycle to YMCA Engineering college, Sector-6, Faridabad to attend his class.  Where he parked his said motorcycle with proper lock and key and he went to attend his class.  After attending his class, when he came out from his class, then he found that his abovesaid motorcycle was not lying there.  The son of the complainant tried his level best to trace out above said motorcycle, but he could not find out the same.  Thereafter, the son of the complainant moved an application regarding theft of his above said motorcycle to the police of P.s.Sector-7, Faridabad and on the basis of which the case bearing FIR No. 741 dated 6.11.2019 u/s 379 of IPC was registered at police station, Sector-7, Faridabad on the statement of son of the complainant regarding theft of his above said motorcycle.   The complainant informed the opposite party immediately at that time regarding missing of his motorcycle and submitted his claim with them.  Besides this the complainant completed each and every formality with the opposite party and requested them to release the payment of insured amount in lieu of theft of his vehicle.  The police submitted its untraced report in concerned Court in the above said FIR.  The complainant approached several times to the opposite party to make the payment of the claimed amount to the complainant, then he was directed to submit the requisite documents and accordingly the complainant submitted the said documents in December 2020 and again other documents also submitted by the complainant.  The opposite party again sent letter dated 02.03.2020, to the complainant to submit other documents i.e.  particulars of vehicle, safe custody letter, previous service record of motorcycle, previous insurance policy. Lateron untraced report was given by the complainant to the opposite party which was submitted by police on 14.09.2020.  Even thereafter, the complainant approached verbal as well as through letters dated 11.12.2020 to the opposite party vide which the complainant gave his willingness to receive the amount of compensation passed by the opposite party.  But the opposite party did not release the payment of compensation amount to the complainant.  Thereafter, the opposite party closed the claim of the complainant on 31.03.2020 vide its letter dated 26.03.2021.The aforesaid act of opposite party amounts to deficiency of service and hence the complaint.  The complainant has prayed for directions to the opposite party to:

a)                pay to the complainant the claimed amount of Rs.29,000/- alongwith interest @ 18% p.a. from the date of its due till realization.

 b)                pay Rs. 50,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment .

c)                 pay Rs. 11,000 /-as litigation expenses.

2.                Opposite party  put in appearance through counsel and filed written statement wherein Opposite party refuted claim of the complainant and submitted that  the Hon’ble Forum had no jurisdiction to entertain and try the present complaint as the opposite party company had rightly repudiated the claim of the complainant after due application of mind, going through the records, in good faith and after complying with the terms & conditions of policy bearing NO. 2221003119P102154879 w.e.f 15.05.2019 to 14.5.2020 insuring the motor cycle bearing NO. HR-29AM/6425 with insured amount of Rs.29,000/-.  The complainant lodged a claim for theft of his motorcycle which was being used regularly by his son Gaurav JKhakhar.  It was told and stated by the complainant that on 5.11.2019 at around 10.00 a.m. complainant’s son who was studying in YMCA university went to the university and reached there at about 10:20 a.m. and parked the vehicle in question in front of the gate of YMCA university.  On the same day at around 4.p.mwhen he came outside from college in the parking place he noticed that the subject vehicle was not there and was stolen away by some unknown person and a complaint to this effect was lodged with the police on 6.11.2019 and accordingly due intimation as given to answering opposite party on 6.11.2019.  After  receiving the information of the theft the answering opposite party sent a letters to the insured vide letter dated 2.12.2019, 12.12.2019, 2.3.2020 and 16.3.2020 for providing documents to process the claim of the insured but the complainant failed to supply the documents timely as such in the compelling circumstances the answering opposite party vide its letter dated 20.03.2020 closed the claim due to non submission of documents and due intimation in this respect vide its letter dated 20.03.2020 of closing the claim was given to the complainant. On receipt of this letter, the complainant kept mum and gave a letter received by the company on 23.09.2020 submitting part documents and request to reopen the case. Thereafter again 11.12.2020 (2 letters) requesting the answering opposite party to reopen and process the claim and after deducting as per norms in the claim amount due to non availability of one key requested the answering opposite party to pay a claim of rs.21650/- which should be accepted by the complainant as full and final amount of his claim.  In this respect the answering opposite party return a letter dated 30.12.2020 to the complainant to submit hard original copy of letter to further process the claim but the complainant kept mum and did not provide the hard original copy of his consent letter as such the answering opposite party was not in a position to process the claim.  In view of the above  circumstances the complainant himself was a guilty person for his no claim/closure of the claim in question and he himself was responsible for closure of the claim which was legally and rightly closed by the answering opposite party as per terms and conditions of the policy.  Opposite party denied rest of the allegations leveled in the complaint and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

3.                The parties led evidence in support of their respective versions.

4.                We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record on the file.

5.                In this case the complaint was filed by the complainant against opposite party– M/s. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. with the prayer to: a)     pay to the complainant the claimed amount of Rs.29,000/- alongwith interest @ 18% p.a. from the date of its due till realization. b) pay Rs. 50,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment . c) pay Rs. 11,000 /-as litigation expenses.

                   To establish his case the complainant  has led in his evidence,  Ex.CW-1/A – affidavit of Birender Singh, Ex.C-1 –RC, Ex.C-2 – Insurance policy, Ex.C-3 – FIR, Ex.C-4 – untraced report, Ex.C-5 – Two wheeler certificate cum policy schedule valid from 15.05.2017 to 14.05.2018, Ex.C-6 – Pollution certificate,, Ex.C-7 – Tax Invoice, Ex.C-8 – Temporary certificate of registration,, Ex.C-9 – Tax invoice, Ex.C-10 – Vehicle particulars (for internal use), Ex.C-11 & 12 – letters, Ex.C-13 -  letter dated 02.03.2020, Ex.C-14 – letter regarding untraceable report, Ex.C-15  & 16– letters, Ex,C-17 – Pan card, Adhaar card, Driving licence, Ex.C-18,  No claim letter dated 26.03.2021,, Ex.C-19 – legal notice,, Ex.C-20 – postal receipt.

On the other hand counsel for the opposite party strongly agitated and

opposed.  As per the evidence of the opposite party  Ex.RW1/A – affidavit of Dinesh Kumar, Admn. Officer, M/s. United India Insurance company Ltd., Sector-16, Faridabad, Ex.R-1 – insurance policy, Ex.R-2 - & 3 – letters, Ex.R-4 – letter dated 02.03.2020, Ex.R-5 – letter dated 16.3.2020, Ex.R-6 – letter dated 20.03.2020, Ex.R-7 -  letter regarding untraceable report, Ex.R-8 -  letter dated 11.12.2020, Ex.R-9 – letter dated 11.12.2020, Ex.R-10 – letter dated 30.12.2020.

6.                In this complaint, the complainant was registered owner of Hero Spender  Motorcycle bearing its registration NO. HR-29-AM-6425, having its engine No. HA10EWGHB62840, Chasis No. MBLHA10BWGHB09135, model 2016,insured with the opposite party vide insurance policy NO.2221003119P102154879  valid from 15.05.2019 to midnight of 14.05.2020 for a total sum of Rs.29,000/- covering the risk of theft etc. On 05.11.2019 the son of the complainant namely Gaurav Jakhar went alongwith above said motorcycle to YMCA Engineering college, Sector-6, Faridabad to attend his class.  Where he parked his said motorcycle with proper lock and key and he went to attend his class.  After attending his class, when he came out from his class, then he found that his abovesaid motorcycle was not lying there.  The son of the complainant tried his level best to trace out above said motorcycle, but he could not find out the same.  Thereafter, the son of the complainant moved an application regarding theft of his above said motorcycle to the police of P.s.Sector-7, Faridabad and on the basis of which the case bearing FIR No. 741 dated 6.11.2019 u/s 379 of IPC was registered at police station, Sector-7, Faridabad on the statement of son of the complainant regarding theft of his above said motorcycle.   Opposite party repudiated the claim of the complainant vide letter dated 26.03.2021 (Ex.C-18) on the ground that “after various reminders you did not submit the required documents.  As claim cannot be kept open for indefinite period the said claim was closed as No Claim dated 31.03.2020 on Non Compliance Basis.”

7.                After going through the evidence led by the parties,  the Commission is of the opinion that the complaint is allowed on non standard basis.

8.                For the adjudication of the present complaint and the issue therein, we place reliance on the Supreme Court Authority Amalendu Sahoo Vs. Oriental Insurance Company in Civil Appeal NO. 2703/2010 decided on 25.3.2010.

                   In Amalendu Sahoo’s case, there was violations of the Terms & conditions of the policy and the insurance benefits were denied by the insurance company.  In the above mentioned case, further reliance was placed by the Supreme Court on:

a).               New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Narayan Prasad Appa Prasad Pathak, and

b).               National Insurance Company Vs. Nitin Khandelwal

Wherein it was observed by the Apex Court that the claim could have been settled on non standard basis in the event of any breach of condition upto 25%. Once the Insurance Company has insured the vehicle for the loss caused to the  insured, the insurance company is liable to indemnify the owner.  When there is breach of the condition of the policy, the insurance company ought to have settled the claim on non standard basis.

9.                Following the aforesaid guidelines, this Commission is of the opinion that the insurance company cannot repudiate the claim in toto.  The complaint is allowed for claim to be settled on non standard basis.  

IDV value of  vehicle                                                     :         Rs.29,700.00

Less Excess Clause                                                         :         Rs.   1,000.00

                                                                                      :         Rs.28,700.00

Deduction 25% on non standard basis  on total              :    -   Rs.  7,17500        

                   Total                                                           :         Rs. 21,525.00

10               The opposite party is directed to pay Rs. 21,525/-  alongwith interest @ 6% p.a to the complainant from the date of filing of complaint till its realization. The opposite party is also directed to pay Rs.2200/- as compensation on account of mental tension, agony and harassment and Rs.2200/- as litigation expenses to the complainant. This payment will be subject to the condition that the complainant will furnish the subrogation letter, cancellation of RC, affidavit, Form 29,30 and  Form 35A.  Compliance of this order be made within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of order. File be consigned to the record room.  Copy of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of costs.

Announced on:  21.11.2022                                 (Amit Arora)

                                                                                  President

                     District Consumer Disputes

           Redressal  Commission, Faridabad.

                                                (Mukesh Sharma)

                Member

          District Consumer Disputes

                                                                    Redressal Commission, Faridabad.

                                                            (Indira Bhadana)

                Member

          District Consumer Disputes

                                                                    Redressal Commission, Faridabad.