Haryana

Karnal

CC/321/2018

Kesari Devi - Complainant(s)

Versus

The National Insurance Company Limited - Opp.Party(s)

Rajbir Singh

18 Oct 2019

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM KARNAL.

 

                                                         Complaint No. 321 of 2018

                                                         Date of instt.21.11.2018

                                                         Date of Decision 18.10.2019

 

Kesari Devi wife of Shri Hukam Chand resident of Gali no.3, Basant Vihar, Karnal.                                                                                  

                                                                                                                                                                        …….Complainant

                                        Versus

 

The National Insurance Company Ltd. Dhanwant Building, Old G.T. Road, near Bus Stand Karnal through its Divisional Manager.

 

                                                                         …..Opposite Party.

 

           Complaint u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.    

 

Before    Sh. Jaswant Singh…….President.     

      Sh.Vineet Kaushik ………..Member

              Dr. Rekha Chaudhary…….Member

 

 Present:  Shri Rajbir Singh Advocate for complainant.

                Smt. Shakuntla Dagar Advocate for OP.    

                               

                (Jaswant Singh President)

 

ORDER:                    

 

                        This complaint has been filed by the complainant u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 on the averments that the complainant is registered owner of motorcycle bearing registration no.HR05AD-9159, which was insured with OP, vide certificate no.39010231176202738544, valid from 05.10.2017 to 04.10.2018 and the OP assessed the value of the said vehicle 19,854/- at that time and the complainant has paid the premium of Rs.1115/- to the OP. On 24.02.2018 the son-in-law of the complainant namely Sunny son of Shree Ram resident of House no.55, Gali no.3, Basant Vihar, Karnal went Mahvir Dal Hospital Karnal and at about 6.30 p.m. the aforesaid Sunny parked the aforesaid motorcycle in front of the Gate of Mahavir Dal Hospital Karnal went to see the children of his relative in the hospital and after ½ hours when he returned back then the aforesaid motorcycle was not found there and some unknown person has theft the aforesaid motorcycle. Thereafter, he made search here and there and he gave information to the local police as well as in the office of the OP. The police of Police Station City Karnal lodged the FIR no.212 dated 1.3.2018 under section 379 of IPC. Thereafter, the complainant alongwith Sunny approached in the office of the OP several times and requested to pay the insured amount of the aforesaid vehicle to the complainant but OP did not pay the claim and postponing the matter on one pretext or the other. In this way there was deficiency in service on the part of the OP. Hence complainant filed the present complaint.

2.             Notice of the complaint was given to the OP, who appeared and filed written version raising preliminary objections with regard to maintainability; cause of action; complaint is premature and concealment of true and material facts. On merits, it is pleaded that the complainant has failed to give intimation of the theft of her motorcycle in writing immediately to the OP upon occurrence. As per the condition no.1 of the policy, this information should have been provided immediately in writing upon occurrence of theft to the OP. It is further pleaded that the insured is required to take all reasonable steps to safeguard the vehicle from loss/damage as per insurance policy condition, which has not been done in the present case. Hence there is no deficiency in service on the part of the OP. The other allegations made in the complaint have been denied and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

3.             Complainant tendered into evidence her affidavit Ex.CW1/A and documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C10 and closed the evidence on 3.7.2019.

4.             On the other hand, OP tendered into evidence affidavit of Bishamber Kumar Anand Ex.OP1/A and closed the evidence on 24.09.2019.

5.             We have appraised the evidence on record, the material circumstances of the case and the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties.

6.             The case of the complainant, in brief, is that  he is registered owner of motorcycle bearing registration no.HR05AD-9159, which was insured with OP, vide certificate no.39010231176202738544, valid from 05.10.2017 to 04.10.2017 and the OP assessed the value of the said vehicle 19,854/-.  On 24.02.2018 the son in law of the  complainant went to the Mahavir Dal Hospital, Karnal to see his relative’s children and said motorcycle was parked by him in front of the gate of Mahavir Dal Hospital, Karnal and when he returned back then the aforesaid motorcycle was not found there and some unknown person has theft the aforesaid motorcycle. Thereafter, he made search here and there and he gave information to the local police as well as in the office of the OP. The police of Police Station City Karnal lodged the FIR no.212 dated 1.3.2018 under section 379 of IPC. Thereafter, the complainant alongwith Sunny approached in the office of the OP several times and requested to pay the insured amount of the aforesaid vehicle to the complainant but OP did not pay the claim and postponing the matter on one pretext or the other.

7.             The case of the OP, in brief, is that the complainant has failed to give intimation of the theft of her motorcycle in writing immediately to the OP upon occurrence. As per the condition no.1 of the policy, this information should have been provided immediately in writing upon occurrence of theft to the OP.

8.             Admittedly, the complainant insured the motorcycle in question with the OP and the same was stolen on 24.02.2018. The main objection of the OP is that the complainant has failed to give the intimation regarding theft of her motorcycle immediately in writing. The claim of the complainant was not released by the OP on the ground that complainant did not submit the requisitioned documents as well as information to the OP in writing till date and claim of the complainant is pre-mature. Thus, we are of the considered view at this stage OP is not deficient in service.

9.             In view of above observation, we dispose of the present complaint with the direction to the complainant to supply all the documents as required by the OP to release the claim of the complainant. We also direct the OP to release the claim of the complainant within one month after submissions of the documents by the complainant. No order as to costs. This order shall be complied with accordingly. The parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced

Dated: 18.10.2019

                                                                        President,

                                                           District Consumer Disputes

                                                           Redressal Forum, Karnal.

 

 

                     (Vineet Kaushik)     (Dr. Rekha Chaudhary) 

                        Member                       Member