(1.) The case of the petitioner is that he purchased Pager No.301860 from OP-4 on 29.7.1996 at a cost of Rs.7,350/-. The said Pager was lost from his custody on 16.12.1996 while he was travelling in a Mini Bus near Lord Sinha Road, Calcutta. The theft was reported to the Park Street P. S. immediately. On being informed, OP-4 suspended the service of the Pager temporarily. The said Pager was insured with the Insurance Company viz. the present appellant. The petitioner lodged the claim with the Insurance Company but it was not entertained on the ground that no FIR was furnished.
(2.) It appears that none appeared for the O. P. despite service of notice upon them. Accordingly, the Forum proceeded to determine the matter ex-parte. Upon consideration of the facts and circumstances, the Forum noticed that there was deficiency in service on the part of O. Ps.1, 2 and 3 and consequently the impugned order was passed directing the O. Ps. to pay jointly and severally Rs.7,000/- to the petitioner besides, paying cost of Rs.300/-.
(3.) The learned Counsel for the appellant submits that the repudiation of the claim was justified on the ground that the complainant could not furnish the copy of FIR. It appears that the loss of Pager by theft was immediately reported to the Police Station and copy of the FIR was furnished to the Insurance Company alongwith the claim papers. Accordingly, we think that the Forum has come to a correct conclusion and no interference with the order is needed. The appeal being devoid of any merit is dismissed ex-parte.