KHEM CHAND SAPRA Vs. ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition arises out of the order passed by the State Commission setting aside the order of the District Forum which had allowed the complaint.

(2.) Briefly the facts of the case are that the complainant had a truck which was insured with the respondent Company. This truck was stolen on 24.11.1989. The driver of the truck lodged a complaint about this incident with the police. A criminal case has been registered under Sections 379/364 of I.P.C. against four persons, including the first informer i.e. the driver of the truck being one of them. The respondent Company kept writing to the petitioner to submit some documents and on not getting replies to this letter and subsequent reminders, the respondent Company wrote to the petitioner of this being a case of "No claim". On some representation, the respondent Insurance Company agreed to re-open the case and informed the same to the petitioner who instead of waiting for the out-come of re-opened case, moved the District Forum for relief who after hearing both the parties directed respondent Company to pay Rs. 1,50,000/- along with interest 12% from the date of filing of the case and cost of Rs. 500/-. On filing appeal by the respondent Company, the State Commission set aside the order of the District Forum, hence this revision petition.

(3.) It is argued by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the State Commission has erred in setting aside the order of the District Forum. There is no dispute that the truck was stolen and theft is covered by the policy, hence the petitioner needs to be indemnified as per terms of the policy. District Forum had passed a well reasoned order. On the other hand, it was argued by the learned Counsel for the Insurance Company that we kept asking for the documents of the truck and of the driver like the driving licence etc. The very fact that along with 379, I.P.C. the accused along with the driver of truck have also been charged under Section 364, I.P.C., hence it is not proved that the truck was stolen. Any loss caused by any criminal breach of trust is not covered by the terms of the policy.