Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

(vi) The plaintiff then submitted all requisite documents with the defendant enclosing the copy of FIR, untraced report of the vehicle issued by the police / court and key of insured vehicle including the CCTV footage of the theft of the insured vehicle.

(vii) The plaintiff time and again made a request to defendant to release the payment of the claim amount, however, to his shock, despite submitting all the requisite documents, the defendant repudiated the claim, vide email dated 26.05.2023 on false and fictious grounds of non-cooperation, suppression of material facts and mis-representation citing that the plaintiff revealed different places of parking of truck before loss and, that after the date of theft, the insured vehicle was seen plying at Rajasthan on 31.03.2022. It is also claimed that plaintiff did not submit all documents as desired by the investigator.

15. She affirmed that plaintiff had sent the copy of PCR message to defendant and affirmed that he also submitted CCTV NIRJA BHATIA footage of the incident. She admitted that he also deposited one key of the vehicle and informed that second key of the vehicle was with the financer. She admitted that plaintiff informed about the proceedings under Section 156(3) CrPC, but did not remember if any final report was filed by the plaintiff and hence could not admit or deny the suggestion in this regard. At later stage, she admitted that an untrace report is filed, however, denied that vehicle was not seen after the occurrence.

NIRJA BHATIA

50. Plaintiff who claims the copy of FIR No. 1060/2022 of PS Noida, order dated 14.09.2022 of Ld. CJM with application under Section 156(3) CrPC and exhibits them as Ex. PW-1/4, neither filed nor exhibited the untrace report, on the basis of which, the recovery is claimed as apparently the order dated 14.09.2022 is not towards accepting any untrace report, rather, the order is towards accepting the revision through which plaintiff appears to have challenged the order of rejection of Ld. MM, which then is set-aside. In absence of above, the entitlement of the plaintiff's claim is doubted.

52. As a reference, at this stage, it is also taken note that an untrace report though is not an untrace report of vehicle and is tendered in connection with the accused having not been traced and their whereabouts being not searched or found. In which parlance, an untrace report is not a proof of content of theft and in order to establish the factum of theft, the plaintiff must have taken recourse by making efforts to prove this allegation. In which background, the plaintiff's avoidance to bring, driver NIRJA Salauddin, mechanic Wasim and/ or other witness, who could BHATIA have corroborated the contents of his assertions is a major lacuna. Moreover, while the plaintiff repeatedly claimed to have given the CCTV footage of the place of occurrence of intervening night, he did not bring any such footage nor made it an exhibit or relied upon the same to establish the truth or substance in the allegation of theft, which all evidence was within his domain.