TEJBIR SINGH Vs. ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revision petitioner Tejbir Singh was the Complainant before District Consumer Forum Rohtak in Complaint No.237 of 2009. The Complaint had been filed against the decision of the respondent/ Oriental Insurance Co., which had repudiated his insurance claim on 11.05.2009. The claim itself had arisen from alleged theft of his insured vehicle on 17.12.2007. The District Forum allowed the complaint holding that the report of the Surveyor appointed by the insurance company itself showed that the date, time and palace of theft was genuine and observing that:-

(2.) The appeal of respondent/Oriental Insurance Co. was allowed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Haryana in FA No.732 of 2011. Before the State Commission, appellant Oriental Insurance Co. also contended that in the instant case the Complainant had given information to the insurance co. on 12 2.2008, whereas the vehicle in question was allegedly stolen/snatched on 17.12.2007. Admittedly, there was a delay of more than two months in informing the insurer, which was a violation of condition no.1 of the policy. The State Commission therefore allowed the appeal holding that:-

(3.) The case of the revision petitioner before us is that the State Commission was wrong in holding that there was delay in informing the insurance company about the theft of the vehicle and that the driver was under the influence of drug (Sulfa Biri). It is also alleged that the State Commission has ignored the investigation report of M/s. Royal Associates Surveyor and Loss Accessories, which clearly stated that the date time and place of theft appeared to be genuine.