LAWS(NCD)-2018-8-124

MANISH SAINI Vs. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD

Decided On August 14, 2018
Manish Saini Appellant
V/S
NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this Revision Petition, under Section 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short "the Act"), petitioners / complainants in the original Complaint, has challenged the order dated 27.03.2017 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Uttarakahand (for short "the State Commission") in First Appeal No.175 of 2015. Vide the impugned order, State Commission has set aside the order of the District Forum and held as under:

(2.) Admitted facts of the case are that Late Neki Ram had purchased a vehicle no. UP-12-Z-6681 and the vehicle was insured with the respondent valid w.e.f. 30.12.2012 to 29.12.2013 at an IDV of Rs.4,75,000/-. Neki Ram expired on 10.08.2013. The vehicle, thereafter, was taken to Ghaziabad from where it was stolen on the night intervening 03/04.12.2013. FIR was registered to this effect. After the theft of the vehicle, complainant claimed the insured amount from the respondent / insurance company.

(3.) Parties led their evidence before the District Forum where the complaint was initially filed and District Forum awarded insurance amount of Rs. 4,75,000/- with 8% interest p.a. from the date of filing of complaint till realization. The said order was upset by the State Commission vide the impugned order. It is argued on behalf of the petitioners that State Commission had committed a grave error in concluding that the LRs of the complainants were not entitled to claim the insured amount on account of failure to get the insurance policy transferred in their name within the stipulated period as mentioned in condition no.9 of the policy. It is also argued that insured died during Hindu-Muslim riots and due to the commotion, needful could not be done and moreover being illiterate persons, they were not aware of such condition. Learned counsel for the respondent has submitted that parties are bound by the terms and conditions of the policy and that expressed written condition of the contract cannot be over-looked simply on the ground that one of the party was not aware of the same.