Om Prakash vs Reliance General Insuarance on 4 October, 2017
11. In the instant case, the respondent has provided cogent reasons for the delay in intimation of the loss of his vehicle. The delay on the part of the police in registering an FIR and the delay in the information to the insurance company cannot be a reason for the rejection of the claim. The conclusion of the investigator that the chassis number had been tampered with is erroneous as it is contrary to the conformance of the number across the RC, Policy and the FIR. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has held in Om Prakash (supra) that rejection of claims on technical grounds in a mechanical manner is not desirable. In the present case, it is apparent that the theft was proven and the petitioner has raised the issue of variation in the chassis number, which was noted to be different only in pre-insurance survey but has subsequently been found to corroborate with details on other documents such as the RC. The FIR report of the jurisdictional police also confirms the finding of the theft. There is, therefore, no cogent evidence on record to disregard this fact.