NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD Vs. MANISH AJMANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -CHALLENGE in this appeal is to the order dated 27. 3. 2006 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Ambala whereby while accepting the complaint of the respondent-complainant following directions have been given to the appellant-opposite party:

(2.) ACCORDING to the case set up by the complainant he had purchased the mobile phone make Nokia-1100 from M/s. Mohan Lal Mukand Lal and Company, Bank Road, Anant Building, Ambala Cantt vide case memo dated 14. 3. 2004 for Rs. 4,800. The INEI Number of the said mobile is 00670400063563350121. It was insured for a period of one year from the date of purchase with the opposite party vide cover note No. 234858. Accordingly, he was issued policy of insurance bearing No. 351700/46039500324. His further version is that he lost the above said mobile in the area of Market Complex of Sector-9, Urban Estate, Ambala City from his car while he was busy in the market. D. D. R. No. 11 dated 11. 8. 2004 was lodged by him. He also informed the loss of mobile to the opposite party. The necessary documents were furnished to the opposite party but the opposite party repudiated the claim on the ground that the loss of mobile was because it was misplaced, which in absence of actual and threatened force is not covered under the condition as per Clause IB (d) of the certificate of insurance issued by the opposite party. Challenging the action of the opposite party present complaint was filed. It was alleged by him that the Clause IB (d) of the certificate of insurance was illegal and against the law. Accordingly, it was prayed that the direction be given to the opposite party to pay the sum insured of the handset mobile in question; to pay interest @ 12% per annum from the date of loss till realization and Rs. 20,000 as compensation on account of mental agony and harassment caused to him. The complaint was contested by the opposite party. In the written statement filed it was pleaded that concocted version had been given by the complainant in order to get the compensation from the opposite party. It was further stated that the complainant never completed the required formalities and had never lodged any report to the Police Station Sadar Ambala and in fact a false story had been rendered by the complainant in the D. D. R. and for that reason risk of the complainant was not covered as per the terms and conditions of the policy. Accordingly, it was prayed that the complaint merited dismissal. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties and evidence adduced on record the District Forum while accepting the complaint came to the conclusion that without any sufficient cause the opposite party had repudiated the claim and issued the directions as per order dated 27. 3. 2006 noticed above. It is against the said order the present appeal has been filed.

(3.) NONE has chosen to appear to argue the matter on behalf of the appellant-opposite party. The respondent-complainant in person has been heard at length.