OM PRAKASH GUPTA Vs. ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ADMITTEDLY the appellant got his TV shop insured with the respondent by obtaining Shopkeeper's Insurance Policy which was valid for period of one year from 11th January, 2001 to 10th January, 2002. On 10th January, 2001, a temporary servant committed theft of 3 colour TVs, six black and white TVs, etc. Consequently he lodged claim with the respondent company. The claim was repudiated in terms of Clause 11 of the policy providing that the company shall not be liable in respect of any loss or damage by burglary or house breaking where any partner or employee of the insured or member of the insured's family is concerned as principal or accessory. Feeling aggrieved, appellant filed the instant complaint before the District Forum seeking indemnification of the loss.

(2.) VIDE impugned order dated 18th May, 2002 passed by the District Forum, the complaint was dismissed by upholding the ground of repudiation of the claim by the respondent.

(3.) THROUGH this appeal, the impugned order has been assailed mainly on the ground that the complainant lodged a report with the police and police took six days in conducting the inquiry and registering the F. I. R. and further that Clause 11 of the policy is not applicable in the instant case inasmuch as that definition of the term 'burglary and/or house breaking' shall mean theft involving entry into or exit from the insured premises by forcible and violent means or theft following assault or violence or threat thereof to the insured or any employee of the insured or member of the insured family.