UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs. ANIL SEHGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal by the United India Insurance Company Limited, Ludhiana against the order of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Jalandhar (hereinafter called the 'District Forum') dated 20.4.2005, by which the complaint of the complainant (respondent in this appeal) was allowed as follows : '7. In this case, the DDR was got recorded by the complainant side and if the police had not registered the formal FIR that was not fault of the complainant. In this case, the respondent had got investigated the matter through their investigator. The story of theft was found true according to reports Exs. R1 and R2 and Surveyor and Assessor of the respondent had assessed Rs. 49,581 and that amount is mentioned in the affidavit Ex. OP -A. Therefore, respondents are bound to pay this amount to the complainant. 8. As such, complaint is allowed and respondent is directed to pay this amount within one month from the receipt of the copy of the order failing which they will have to pay 6% interest till payment from the date of present order. Copies of the order be sent to the parties free of costs under the rules. File be consigned to the record room.'

(2.) HENCE the present appeal by the Insurance Company.

(3.) THE opposite party, i.e., United India Insurance Company Ltd., contested the complaint. The Insurance Company on receiving the information regarding the alleged loss, engaged the services of National Detective and Consultancy Services, Jalandhar to investigate the matter. After investigation report was submitted by the investigating agency that as per the version of management of the said Hotel no loss of purse containing jewellery and cash and taken place in their hotel though a DDR dated 29.12.2000 instead of FIR regarding the loss/theft had been recorded on the written application of Vikram Sehgal in Police Post, Sector 6, Panchkula. It was also averred that there was different version given by Vikram Sehgal and his wife Pooja and the factum of their lack of interest in the tracing of the alleged lost articles by simply getting a DDR instead of an FIR recorded.