S.C. case No. FA/761 of 2012. Case: Monjay Das Vs Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. and Ors.. West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
| Case Number | S.C. case No. FA/761 of 2012 |
| Counsel | For Appellant: Mr. Ratan Banik, Advocate and For Respondents: Mr. Debasis Bhandari, Advocate for the Respondent Nos. 1, 2 and Mr. Prasanta Banerjee, Advocate for the Respondent No. 3 |
| Judges | Debasis Bhattacharya and Jagannath Bag, Members |
| Issue | Indian Penal Code 1860, (IPC) - Sections 34, 392 |
| Judgement Date | January 13, 2014 |
| Court | West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission |
Order:
Debasis Bhattacharya, Member
-
Being aggrieved by the judgment dated 29.8.2012, delivered by the learned District Forum, Siliguri, in Case No. 64/S/2011, the Complainant thereof has preferred this appeal. By the impugned judgment, the learned District Forum has dismissed the case on contest, but without cost. The case of the Complainant is that he purchased one Chevrolet Travera Motor Vehicle on 8.9.2005, which was insured with the OP No. 2 for a sum assured of Rs. 6,10,000 (Rupees six lakh ten thousand) for the period from 31.12.2006 to 30.12.2007, vide Policy No. 313207/31/2007/3831 and the vehicle was hypothecated to the OP No. 3. While the Complainant was on tour in the North-East with his said vehicle and Driver, and returning from Senapati, Manipur after visiting his friend, they reached a Petrol Pump, namely, Faithful Services, 5th Mile, Dimapur, Nagaland, at about 1.40 a.m. on 6.4.2007 for taking petrol. At that time, three unknown persons came there on a Scooter and suddenly started beating them mercilessly and they forcibly snatched the key of the vehicle from the Driver and ran away with the vehicle along with the relevant papers of the vehicle and cash of Rs. 10,000 (Rupees ten thousand) in a handbag, for which he lodged an F.I.R., being No. 31/07, under Section 392/34, I.P.C., under G.D.E. No. 76/07 dated 6.4.2007, which ultimately ended in a Final Report, being No. 22/07, which was accepted by the learned Judicial Magistrate (1st Class), Dimapur, Nagaland. On return to Siliguri, he immediately informed the matter to the OP No. 2 by a letter dated 10.4.2007 with copy to the A.R.T.O., Siliguri, and also the OF No. 3 by a letter dated 16.4.2007. But, finally, to his utter surprise, he received a letter dated 4.2.2010 from the OP No. 2 informing that his claim is repudiated on the ground of his vehicle being used for commercial purposes. Being aggrieved, he served legal notice to the OP No. 2 through his Lawyer, Mr. Ratan Banik. Such denial of the insurance claim by the OP No. 2 amounts to unfair trade practice or deficiency in service of OP Nos. 1 and 2. As such, the case.
-
On the other hand, the case of the OP Nos. 1 and 2 is that the OP No. 2 appointed an independent I.R.D.A. approved and licensed Surveyor, Mr. Arabinda Prasad Maitra of Siliguri, who collected the information that the vehicle was being used for carrying passengers from the vehicle parking place near Hotel Manila, Hill Cart Road Pradhan Nagar...
To continue reading
Request your trial