State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
The New India Assurance Co. vs Satish Kumar on 1 July, 2015
Daily Order Heading1 Heading2 First Appeal No. A/31/2015 (Arisen out of Order Dated 07/11/2014 in Case No. 325/11 of District Bhiwani) 1. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. REGIONAL OFFICE SCO 36-37 SECTOR 17A CHANDIGARH ...........Appellant(s) Versus 1. SATISH KUMAR S/O SH.JAGAN SINGH, VILLAGE AND POST OFFICE MEHRA TEHSIL CHARKHI DADRI DISTT.BHIWANI ...........Respondent(s) BEFORE: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Nawab Singh PRESIDENT HON'BLE MR. B M Bedi JUDICIAL MEMBER HON'BLE MR. Diwan Singh Chauhan MEMBER For the Appellant: For the Respondent: ORDER STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA, PANCHKULA First Appeal No : 31 of 2015 Date of Institution: 12.01.2015 Date of Decision : 01.07.2015 1. The New India Assurance Company Limited through its Regional Manager, Chandigarh Regional Office SCO 36-37, Sector 17-A, Chandigarh. 2. Branch Manager, The New India Assurance Company Limited, Railway Road, Opposite Civil Hospital, Bhiwani, now through R.N. Gupta, Regional Manager, The New India Assurance Company Limited, Regional Office, SCO 36-37, Sector 17-A, Chandigarh. Appellants-Opposite Parties Versus Satish Kumar s/o Sh. Jagan Singh, VPO Mehra, Tehsil Charkhi Dadri, District Bhiwani. Respondent-Complainant CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nawab Singh, President. Shri B.M. Bedi, Judicial Member.
Shri Diwan Singh Chauhan, Member Present: Shri Raghujeet Singh Madan, Advocate for appellants.
Shri Maninder Singh, Advocate for respondent.
O R D E R NAWAB SINGH J.(ORAL) This Opposite Parties' appeal is directed against the order dated November 7th, 2014, passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (for short District Forum), Bhiwani, whereby complaint filed by Satish Kumar-complainant (respondent herein) was allowed. For facilitation, the operative part of the order is reproduced as under:-
".......the complaint of the complainant is allowed with costs and the respondents company is directed:-
To pay the insured sum along with interest @ 12% from the date of filing of this complaint till its realization. To pay Rs.2200/- as litigation charges".
Note: The complainant is directed to submit the indemnity bond in favour of the respondents company within 15 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order and after that the respondents company is directed to pay the insured within month to the complainant".
2. Satish Kumar-complainant (respondent herein) got his truck, bearing registration No.HR-63B-1042, insured with The New India Assurance Company Limited (for short 'the Insurance Company')-Opposite Parties, from June 23rd, 2008 to June 22nd, 2009. During the intervening night of May 17/18th, 2009, the truck was stolen in the area of Auto Market, Bhiwani. F.I.R. No.283 (Annexure-12) was lodged in Police Station, City Bhiwani on the same day, that is, June 18th, 2009. The complainant gave intimation to the Insurance Company. He filed claim with the Insurance Company but it did not pay the insured amount.
3. The complainant filed complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
4. The Insurance Company contested the complaint. It was stated that Shri Hawa Singh, was appointed as Investigator who submitted his report dated August 19th, 2009. The complainant was requested to supply untraceable report, copy of FIR, and other relevant documents but he failed to produce the same. Accordingly, his claim was closed vide letter dated July 7th, 2010. On these premises, it was pleaded that complaint deserved dismissal.
5. After evaluating the evidence of the parties, the District Forum allowed the complaint as detailed in paragraph No.1 of this order.
6. It is not disputed that the truck of the respondent was insured with the Insurance Company and the same was stolen during the subsistence of the policy. FIR No.283 (Annexure-12) was lodged in Police Station, City Bhiwani. Accused Sandeep, Sombir, Devender and Dharamender were arrested. Their disclosure statements (Annexure-2 to Annexure-5) were recorded by the Police. However, the truck could not be recovered. Report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. (Annexure-13) was submitted in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhiwani. Since the accused were arrested and they were facing trial, so question of producing un-traced report did not arise.
7. In National Insurance Company Limited vs. Kunwar Pal and another, 2014 (3), PLR, 315, it was held by the Hon'ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana that delay of intimation or in submission of the documents cannot be a ground for repudiating the policy.
8. In this view of the matter, the order passed by the District Forum requires no interference. Hence, the appeal is dismissed.
9. The statutory amount of Rs.25,000/- deposited at the time of filing the appeal be refunded to the respondent-complainant against proper receipt and identification in accordance with rules, after the expiry of period of appeal/revision, if any.
Announced 01.07.2015 Diwan Singh Chauhan Member B.M. Bedi Judicial Member Nawab Singh President CL [HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Nawab Singh] PRESIDENT [HON'BLE MR. B M Bedi] JUDICIAL MEMBER [HON'BLE MR. Diwan Singh Chauhan] MEMBER