UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. KEHAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Revision Petition has been filed by 'United India Insurance Co. Ltd.' under Sec. 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the impugned Order dtd. 14/12/2015 passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Haryana in F.A. No. 3027 of 2003, vide which the Appeal filed by the Petitioner was partly allowed, and the Order of the District Forum was upheld with modified directions.

(2.) The factual background, in brief, is that the Complainant Kehar Singh is the owner of one Tata Sumo vehicle bearing registration No. HR-51/D-7181, which was insured with the Petitioner w.e.f. 3/12/1999 to 2/12/2000, for an IDV of Rs.3.00 lacs. He engaged one Rajender as his driver to drive the said vehicle. On 8/9/2000, the Complainant loaded some household goods and asked his driver to unload the same at District Gautam Budh Nagar. However, the driver did not reach the destination, nor any information was received of his whereabouts. The Complainant reported the matter to Police vide DDR No. 16 dtd. 14/4/2000, but the Police did not lodge an FIR. The Insurance Company was also informed of the incident. On the directions of the Addl. CJM, Faridabad, an FIR dtd. 8/2/2001 was later filed under Sec. 406 of the IPC. The Police submitted untraced report, and the Complainant filed his claim before the Petitioner. The Petitioner repudiated the claim vide letter dtd. 14/12/2001 on the ground that there was delay in giving intimation to the Insurance Company and that the Complainant had not furnished the required documents for settling the claim. Aggrieved by the repudiation of his claim, he filed Complaint before the District Forum, Faridabad.

(3.) The District Forum vide its Order dtd. 17/10/2003 allowed the Complaint and directed the Petitioner to pay to the Complainant Rs.3,60,000.00 along with interest @12% p.a. from the date of theft of the vehicle till the date of realisation, Rs.5,000.00 for mental agony, Rs.1,000.00 towards cost of litigation. The Petitioner filed its Appeal before the State Commission, which, vide the impugned Order dtd. 14/12/2015 partly allowed the Appeal and upheld the Order of the District Forum with modified directions. The relevant extracts of the impugned Order are set out as below '