State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Tirath Ram vs Reliance General Insurance Company ... on 30 May, 2018
Daily Order The complainant's vehicle (truck) having IDV of Rs.13.50 lacs was insured with the Opposite Party between 01.07.2011 to 30.06.2012. It is case of the complainant that the said vehicle was stolen in the intervening night of 16.04.2012 and 17.04.2012. The driver was also missing. Thereafter, history to locate the vehicle has been given. It is also mentioned that when the complainant failed to locate the vehicle, FIR No.98 was recorded under Section 407 IPC on 17.04.2012. It is case of the complainant that vide letter dated 18.08.2012 the Opposite Party raised some unnecessary objections. To state that loss would not amount to theft, as FIR was recorded under Section 307 IPC. Be that as it may, we have perused the letter, referred to above. The last para of the letter reads thus :-
"We empathize with the loss sustained by you but regret to inform you that the loss is not payable due to violation of Policy Terms & Conditions and reasons stated above. In view of the same, we are constrained to repudiate the claim and this claim may please be treated as closed. We regret we could not consider your claim favourably and trust that you would understand and appreciate our point of view.
The enclosed annexure-I provides you information on the process of resolving issues adopted by our company, if you are not satisfied with out decision."
The above letter clearly indicates that claim was repudiated. Nothing further remains to be done by the authorities. It was the duty of the complainant to lay challenge to the order of said repudiation at that stage or may be within two years thereafter ; it was not done. It appears that thereafter some communications were sent inter-se the parties but that cannot enlarge the period of limitation up to 2016. As per admitted position, at the time of arguments, up to 2016, nothing was done by the complainant. He never laid challenge to the letter/order dated 18.08.2012. Thereafter, it appears that some letter was issued by the opposite parties asking some information. We are of the opinion that the said letter may be issued under some misunderstanding because once the claim stands rejected, there is no necessity to call for any information. Non-traceable Report was confirmed by the Magistrate on 30.10.2014 but still thereafter, nothing was done by the complainant. He wrote one letter on 29.10.2015 asking the opposite parties regarding status of case and again similar letter was written on 20.07.2017.
Above facts clearly show that the claim application was not prosecuted in a proper manner. There is a limitation provided in Consumer Protection Act, 1986, according to which, compliant needs to be filed within two years from the date of accrual of cause of action. Cause of action accrued to the complainant on 18.08.2012 when his claim was repudiated. Thereafter, no action was taken by him.
In view of above, this complaint stands dismissed being barred by limitation.
Certified copy of this order be sent to the parties free of charge.