SANJEEV TIWARI Vs. NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the order dated 21.11.2002 passed by District Forum, Gurgaon in Complaint Case No. 451 dated 14.3.2002, whereby while accepting the complaint against the respondent -opposite parties, the appellant -complainant has been awarded a compensation amount of Rs. 40,000 along with interest @ 9% per annum which shall be payable after three months from the date of accident till the date of payment.

(2.) THE facts as can be gathered from the record briefly stated are that Sanjeev Tiwari - complainant had purchased a new motor -cycle LML Adreno (silver colour) bearing No. HR -26M -7542 from M/s. Premier Auto Enterprises for Rs. 45,180 and insured the same for Rs. 45,200 on 26.2.2001 with the opposite party No. 4 vide policy No. 117565. On 22.6.2001 the complainant after locking the motor cycle parked in front of the office of opposite party No. 4 and went inside the office and when he returned after 10 minutes, he left his motor cycle stolen. F.I.R No. 417 was registered with City Police Station, Gurgaon on 23.6.2001. Thereafter the complainant submitted all the relevant documents including the FIR with the opposite party No. 4 and untraced report was also submitted on 3.9.2001. On 17.8.2001 urveyor - Khetarpal was deputed but still the claim was not settled. Faced by these circumstances, the complainant invoked the jurisdiction of the District Forum, Gurgaon with the prayer for payment of Rs. 45,180 along with interest @ 2% per month from the date it became due till the date of payment. In addition, Rs. 50,000 claimed as damages on account of mental agony and harassment and Rs. 2,200 as expenses for sending legal notices to the opposite parties.

(3.) ON notice, opposite party Nos. 1 to 4 resisted the complaint. It was pleaded by them that at the time of theft of the vehicle its market value was Rs. 38,000 to Rs. 40,900. It was further stated that the complainant has not completed the formalities by submitting the requisite documents as per report of the Surveyor and at the same time, it was stated that a sum of Rs. 39,000 was offered to the complainant as damages but it was not accepted by him. They repudiated the claim on the ground that the vehicle was stolen due to the negligence of the complainant as he left the motor cycle unlocked. Rest of the allegations made by the complainant were denied.