DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

PATIALA.

                                      Consumer Complaint No. 339 of 6.9.2017

                                      Decided on:         9.7.2021

Udham Singh, aged about 67 years, s/o Sh.Nagina Singh R/o H.No.530, Ward No.5, Dharampura Colony, Kalka Road, Rajpura.

                                                                   …………...Complainant

                                      Versus

1. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. through its General Manager, Head Office 24, Whites Road, Chennai-600014.
2. United India Insurance Co. Ltd., through its Senior Branch Manager, Branch Office, Calibre Market, 1^st Floor, 10-11-E, Patiala Road, Rajpura,140401.

                                                                   …………Opposite Parties

Complaint under the Consumer Protection Act

QUORUM

                                      Sh. Jasjit Singh Bhinder, President

                                      Sh.Vinod Kumar Gulati, Member    

ARGUED BY

                                      Sh.P.S.Jaggi, counsel for complainant.

                                      Sh.D.P.S.Anand, counsel for OPs.

 ORDER

                                      JASJIT SINGH BHINDER,PRESIDENT

1. This is the complaint filed by Udham Singh (hereinafter referred to as the complainant) against United India Insurance Co. Ltd. and another (hereinafter referred to as the OP/s) under the Consumer Protection Act(for short the Act).
2. The brief facts of the case are that the complainant is owner of the motor cycle No.PB-11-AB-2624 make Hero Honda Splender Plus and he got the same insured with the OPs vide package policy No.1110073113P104417963 for the period from 16.10.2013 to 15.10.2014 and paid the premium of the policy.
3. It is averred that on the night of 24.7.2014, the aforesaid motor cycle was stolen while it was parked outside the house of the complainant. It is further averred that some other vehicles were also stolen on the subsequent dates i.e. Mohinder Max Pickup bearing registration No.PB-10-BW-2447 owned by Sh.Kunal s/o Sh.Harbans Lal r/o H.No.3018 Ward No.14,Rajpura Town, Rajpura, District, Patiala on 17.8.2014.Accordingly complainant alongwith Sh.Kunal has reported the matter to the police and FIR No.205 dated 18.9.2014 under Section 379/411 IPC was got registered with Police Station City Rajpura.The complainant also approached OP No.2 for claim of the stolen motor cycle but no heed was paid. The complainant also furnished copy of FIR and requisite documents to the OP No.2 but the OP vide letter dated 9.8.2016 rejected the claim of the complainant illegally and arbitrarily, which caused mental agony and pain to the complainant. There is thus deficiency in service on the part of the OPs. Hence this complaint with the prayer to accept the complaint by giving direction to the OPs to pay the cost of motorcycle of Rs.50,000/-; to pay Rs.50,000/-as compensation and also to pay Rs.50,000/-as costs of litigation expenses.
4. Upon notice OPs appeared through counsel and contested the complaint by filing written reply having raised preliminary objections that the complaint is not maintainable as the claim of the complainant has already been rejected on the ground that he failed to submit the documents as demanded for settlement of the claim vide letters dated 11.8.2014, 1.9.2014,16.9.2014 and 28.4.2015.
5. On merits, it is submitted that OP had issued insurance policy for the motor cycle bearing No.PB-11-AV-2624 for the period from 16.10.2013 to 15.10.2014 for a sum of Rs.30,000/-.It is submitted that the complainant has not lodged any FIR/DDR with the police regarding the theft of insured vehicle , however, he had submitted FIR No.205 dated 18.9.2014,P.S.City Rajpura ,which was lodged by one Sh.Kunal s/o Sh.Harbans Lal regarding the theft of his Mahindra Pickup van and in that FIR the number of the motor cycle in question is mentioned. It is pleaded that the police was informed on 18.9.2014 after a gap of more than 54 days and the insurance company was intimated on 29.7.2014,which amounts to violation of terms and conditions of the insurance policy. There is thus no deficiency in service on the part of the OPs. After denying all other averments ,the OPs have prayed for the dismissal of the complaint.
6. In support of the complaint, the ld. counsel for the complainant has tendered in evidence,Ex.CA affidavit of the complainant alongwih documents Exs.C1 to C6 and closed the evidence.
7. On the other hand, the ld. counsel for the OPs has tendered in evidence Ex.OP1 affidavit of Sh.Mohinder Dawar, Deputy Manager alongwith documents Exs.OP2 to OP9 and closed the evidence.
8. We have heard the ld. counsel for the parties and have also gone through the record of the case, carefully.
9. The ld. counsel for the complainant has argued that the complainant is the owner of motor cycle No. PB-11-AB-2624 Hero Honda Splender.The ld. counsel further argued that complainant has insured the motor cycle with the OPs from 16.10.2013 to 15.10.2014 and had paid the premium of the insurance policy. The ld. counsel further argued that on 24.7.2014 while  the motor cycle  was parked outside the house of the complainant it was stolen by un known person. The ld. counsel further argued that some other vehicle was also stolen subsequently so a joint FIR no.205 dated 18.9.2014 was got registered with Police Station City Rajpura.The ld. counsel further submitted that the complainant submitted all the documents with the OPs  but they wrongly rejected his claim, so the complaint be allowed.
10. On the other hand, the ld. counsel for the OPs has argued that the complainant has not submitted the documents despite sending repeated letters  time and again. Ultimately the claim was rejected. The ld. counsel further argued that as the complainant never submitted the documents, so the complaint be dismissed. The ld. counsel has also placed reliance upon  the case 1(2016)CPJ83 (NC) Kanha Trading Company Vs. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. & Anr.
11. To prove this case, the complainant has tendered his affidavit,Ex.CA and he has deposed as per his complaint, Ex.C1 is the letter written by the OPs to the complainant, Ex.C2 is copy of  order  dated  25.7.2016 passed by Ld. JMIC, Rajpura, vide which the case was closed,Ex.C3 is vehicle enquiry report of FIR No.205 dated 18.9.2014 under Section 379/411 IPC.
12. Vide Ex.C1, the claim was rejected on 9.8.2016. It is written in this letter that the complainant had not supplied the required documents to the insurance company.Ex.C3 is the document of Ministry of Home Affairs, in which it is reported that the motor cycle in question was not recovered.Ex.C4 is FIR No.205 dated 18.9.2014.It was lodged by one Kunal of Rajpura in which it is also mentioned that one motor cycle of Udham Singh having No.PB-AV-2624  make splender was stolen on 24.7.2014.Ex.C6 is the policy of motor cycle from 16.10.2013 to 15.10.2014 and the insured value is mentioned as Rs.30,000/-and the premium was paid.
13. On the other hand Sh.Mohinder Dawer, Deputy Manager has tendered his affidavit,Ex.OP1and he has deposed as per the written statement and he has further deposed that even after writing letters dated 11.8.2014, 1.9.2014,16.9.2014 and 28.4.2015, the complainant failed to submit required documents and ultimately the claim was rejected on 9.8.2016.The letters are Exs.OP3,OP4,OP5,OP6 and OP7 but it is not proved on the file that the same have been sent through registered post or the same have been received by the complainant as there  is no acknowledgement of these letters has been produced by the OPs on the file.Ex.OP8 is a letter written by the complainant to the Manager United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Rajpura received on 30.3.2015.It is mentioned that motor cycle No. PB-11-AB-2624 Splender was stolen on 24.7.2014 and all the documents were in the motor cycle and he has only having a policy. So it is clear that everything was intimated by the complainant to insurance company.Ex.OP9 is copy of FIR.
14. The claim of the complainant was rejected vide letter Ex.C1 dated 9.8.2016.It is stated that the required documents were not submitted but the OPs have attached a letter written by Udham Singh complainant to the insurance company in which he has mentioned that all the original documents were in the motor cycle which was stolen and only he has having insurance policy with him and he had already submitted FIR and copy of driving licence. So it is clear as per the document which has been placed by the OPs that OPs has to pay the claim as OPs have clearly mentioned that the original documents were stolen in the motor cycle and the complainant has only having insurance policy and he had submitted copy of driving licence and copy of FIR with the OPs.  After receiving all these documents there was no occasion for the insurance company to reject the claim of the complainant.
15. Copy of FIR is on the file which was lodged by one Kunal, in which it is also mentioned that motor cycle of Udham Singh son of Nagina Singh resident of # 530,Dharampura Colony, Old Rajpura, having No.PB-11AV-2624 splender  was stolen on 24.7.2014. There is document Ex.C3 of Govt. of India, in which it is mentioned that the motor cycle in question was not recovered. Copy of RC of the motor cycle is Ex.C5 and policy is Ex.C6 and it covered the period when motor cycle was stolen on 13.10.2015 and value of the motor cycle was 30,000/-.So, it is clear that theft of the motor cycle No.PB-11-AB-2624 Hero Honda Splender of the complainant has taken place and the FIR was registered.
16. So due to our above discussion, we partly allow the complaint and the OPs are directed to pay Rs.30,000/- to the complainant, the value of the motor cycle mentioned in the insurance policy, alongwith interest @6% per annum from the date of rejection of claim i.e. 9.8.2016 till realization and also to pay Rs.10,000/- as compensation and Rs.10,000/- as costs of litigation.  

Compliance of the order be made by the OPs within a period of 45 days from the date of the receipt of the certified copy of this order.

ANNOUNCED

DATED:9.7.2021         

                                         Vinod Kumar Gulati         Jasjit Singh Bhinder

                                                Member                             President