INDUSIND BANK LIMITED Vs. M ANIL KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellants are the 2nd opposite party/financier in CC 288/09 in the file of CDRF, Kannur. The opposite parties including the financiers are under orders to settle the claim of the complainant and refund the balance amount after adjusting the principal loan amount with interest up to the date of surrender of the vehicle to the financier and also pay Rs. 1,000 as costs to the complainant.

(2.) THE case of the complainant is that he had availed finance from the 2nd opposite party to the tune of Rs. 27,000 for the purchase of Hero Honda splender motor cycle for a sum of Rs. 40,090. The vehicle was surrendered on 21.7.2008 because of financial stringency. It was assured that the value of the vehicle will be adjusted in the loan amount and the balance will be paid to him. After one week when he contacted the 2nd opposite party it was told that the vehicle was stolen from the custody of the financier and that the financier has lodged a complaint on 25.7.2008 before the police. As requested by the financier an authorization letter in favour of the financier was issued by the complainant for receiving the insurance claim. The amount would not paid. It is alleged that the insurer and the financiers/opposite parties 1 and 2 have colluded and the genuine claim of the complainant stands not honoured. No reply was received to the lawyer notice sent toboth the opposite parties. The loan was availed on 29.8.2007 and within one year the vehicle was stolen.

(3.) THE 1st oppsite party insurer has filed version contending that the theft was reported to the police only on 25.7.2008. There is violation of policy conditions. The financier intimated the 2nd opposite party only on 1.8.2008 although the theft allegedly took place on 21.7.2008. It is denied that there was no authorization by the complainant to the 2nd opposite party/ financier. It is contended that the financier is not liable to pay any amount.