SUBHASH AGRAWAL Vs. ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal arises out of the order dated 12.7.2005 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Raipur (hereinafter referred to as District Forum for short) in Complaint Case No. 15/2005 whereby the complaint dismissed.

(2.) BRIEF facts necessary for disposal of this appeal are that the Hero Honda Motor Cycle bearing No. M.P. 23 -MD -8983, in the name of the complainant was insured with the opposite party/respondent under Package Policy for Zone B Motor Cycle for the period from 14.10.2003 to 13.10.2004. During the aforesaid period the vehicle was stolen on 1.11.2003 from the place near Dr. Sur s Clinic near Mandi Gate where the complainant s friend Mahendra had parked it and after duly locking the same had gone to take dinner with his friends. Next morning when the said Mahendra went to take the vehicle the same was found missing. Consequently, Mahendra had lodged FIR with the Pandri Police Station and had also intimated the RTO and the S.P. Office. Claim was filed before the insurer but the same was repudiated on flimsy grounds and such conduct on part of the insurer amounted to deficiency in service, hence the complainant had to file complaint before the District Forum.

(3.) THE opposite party/insurer resisted the complaint and denied the allegations of the complainant. It was averred in the written version that intimation to the insurer was given by Mahendra after 4 days of the alleged theft. It was further averred that it was Mahendra Khurana who had filed claim form on 5.11.2003, though without any documents, this shows that Mahendra was the owner of the vehicle at the time of accident. It was further averred in the written version that it was revealed from the report and investigation that the complainant had explicitly violated terms of policy and hence, was not entitled to receive the claim, hence his claim was repudiated vide letter dated 12.8.2004. It is also averred in additional pleadings that the vehicle was left unattended by Mahendra Khurana near Dr. Sur s clinic at Pandri and the incident had taken place due to his own negligence and all this amounted to violation of terms of the policy. It was further alleged in additional pleadings that the vehicle was insured in the name of the complainant and Mahendra was not eligible to file claim before the insurer. On investigation, it was revealed that without giving intimation to the insurer, the complainant had sold the vehicle to Mahendra, though the same was not recorded with the RTO.