BUDHA GANESH Vs. NEW INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER in this case is the complainant and the Respondent Insurance Company was the Opposite Party before the District Forum. The only issue that arises for our consideration and decision in this case is the effect of delay in reporting theft of the insured vehicle to the Police and/or the Insurance Company.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the tractor and trolley of the petitioner was insured with the OP Insurance Company for the period from 31.12.2005 to 30.12.2006. It was alleged that the tractor and the trolley were stolen on 9.9.2006 during the period of insurance. However, the FIR was filed on 13.9.2006 and the Insurance Company was informed on 19.9.2006. Though, the information was delayed, yet, the Insurance Company appointed an investigator who gave the report that it was not the case of theft, but the persons traveling with the insured in the tractor had taken it away after putting some intoxicating substance in his food at a 'dhaba ' where all of them had alighted to have food. The Insurance Company after receiving report of the surveyor repudiated the claim of the insured/complainant on the ground of delay in reporting the matter. It also alleged that the investigation done by the surveyor indicated that the incident of theft is false and concocted. This led the complainant to file a consumer complaint against the Opposite party/Insurance Company for deficiency in service before the District Forum which vide its order dated 01.01.2008 accepted the complaint in terms of the following directions:

(3.) WE have heard learned Shri Pancham Lal, Advocate for the petitioner and Shri R.C. Mishra, Advocate for the Respondent/Insurance Company. It is not in dispute that the alleged theft had taken place on 9.9.2006, but the FIR came to be filed on 13.9.2006 and the Insurance Company was intimated about the incident on 19.9.2006. The State Commission has upset the finding of the District Forum mainly on the ground of delay on the part of the Petitioner/Complainant in filing the FIR and informing the Insurance Company about the theft. In returning its finding the State Commission has relied on the judgment and order of this Commission in the case of New India Assurance Company Ltd. Vs. Trilochan Jane (Pronounced on 9.12.2009 in Appeal No. 321 of 2005) while non -suiting the claim of the petitioner and dismissing the complaint. Learned Counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner is an uneducated person who does not understand the legal implications and importance of the condition given in the insurance policy. He, therefore, submitted that keeping in view the violation of the condition of the policy regarding immediate filing of the FIR and intimation to the Insurance Company about the incident of theft, the claim of the Petitioner/Complainant can be settled on non -standard basis to the extent of 75% of the value of the vehicle insured keeping in view the ratio laid down by the Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Nitin Khandelwal (2008) 11 SCC 259. He contended that the impugned order of the State Commission based on the order in Trilochan Jane Case (Supra) decided by the National Commission be set aside and relief be granted to the petitioner in terms of the ratio laid down by the Apex Court in the Nitin Khandelwal Case (Supra).