ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LTD Vs. MAHAVIR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal, filed by the appellant under Sec.15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') is directed against order dated 27.10.1999, passed by District Forum No. III in Complaint Case No.3623/98-entitled Shri Mahavir Singh V/s. M/s. Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. and Ors.

(2.) The facts relevant for the disposal of the present appeal lie in a narrow compass. Respondent No.1/complainant Shri Mahavir Singh (hereinafter referred to as 'respondent') had filed a complaint under Sec.12 of the Act before the District Forum averring that the complainant had obtained an insurance cover for his truck bearing No. DL IL-A 9304 from the appellant for the period from 9.12.1996 to 8.12.1997. It was averred in the complaint by the respondent that on 19.5.1997 the driver of the truck, by name Sh. Bansidhar had taken the truck on the pretext of having the same repaired alongwith an amount of Rs.30,000/-. It was averred that said Sh. Bansidhar did not come back. The return of said Sh. Bansidhar was awaited and when said Sh. Bansidhar did not return with the truck, a complaint (FIR) was lodged with the police and the respondent also filed a claim within the appellant as the truck in question was duly insured with the appellant. As the claim of the respondent was not honoured by the appellant the respondent filed the complaint before the District Forum praying that the appellant, be directed to pay a sum of Rs.1,60,000/- being the costs of the vehicle alongwith interest and compensation to the extent of Rs.35,000/-.

(3.) The claim of the respondent in the District Forum was contested by the appellant. The plea taken by the appellant before the District Forum was that as the loss in question was caused to the respondent as a result of 'criminal breach of trust', alleged to have been committed by the driver of the truck and not as a result of 'theft', the claim of respondent Mahavir Singh could not be honoured by the appellant. Another plea taken by the appellant before the District Forum was that the respondent Mahavir Singh had lodged report (FIR) with the police after a delay of nine days.