Your World of Legal Intelligence
 India | 1-800-335-6202

First Appeal No. 555 of 2014. Case: Shriram General Insurance Company Limited Vs Manoj. Haryana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission

Document Cited in Precedent Map Related
Vincent
Case NumberFirst Appeal No. 555 of 2014
Party NameShriram General Insurance Company Limited Vs Manoj
CounselFor Appellant: Vinod Arya, Advocate
JudgesNawab Singh, J. (President), B.M. Bedi, Member (J) and Urvashi Agnihotri, Member
IssueIndian Penal Code 1860, (IPC) - Section 379
CitationIII (2015) CPJ 99 (Har.)
Judgement DateJuly 08, 2015
CourtHaryana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission

Order:

Nawab Singh, J. (President)

  1. Shriram General Insurance Company Limited is in appeal against the order dated April 15th, 2014 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (for short District Forum), Jhajjar. Manoj-complainant (respondent) got his motorcycle bearing Registration No. HR-14F-3331 insured with Shriram General Insurance Company Limited-opposite party (appellant, hereinafter referred as Insurance Company) for the period from September 24th, 2010 to September 23rd, 2011. The Insured Declared Value (for short IDV) of the vehicle was Rs. 32,000. The vehicle was stolen on August 20th, 2011 when it was parked in the area of Fire Brigade Office at Palwal. F.I.R. No. 327 under Section 379, I.P.C. was registered in Police Station, City Palwal on August 31st, 2011. The information was given to the appellant- Insurance Company. The insurer did not pay the insurance benefits to the respondent- complainant. Hence, the complaint.

  2. The appellant-opposite party contested the complaint by filing written statement and denied the averments made in the complaint. It was stated that there was delay of eleven days in lodging the F.I.R. and delay of 33 days in giving intimation to the Insurance Company and therefore complainant's claim was repudiated because of violation of the terms and conditions of the Insurance Policy.

  3. After evaluating the evidence of the parties, District Forum accepted the complaint and directed the appellant-opposite party as under:

    .................it is directed that the respondent shall make the payment of a sum of Rs. 32,000 as sum insured under policy in question which is Ex. P-2 along with an interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of alleged theft i.e. 20.8.2011 till realization of final payment to the complainant. The complainant is also entitled for a sum of Rs. 2,000 on account of litigation expenses for the present unwanted and unwarranted litigation only due to the deficiency in service on the part of the respondent. The complaint stands disposed of accordingly.

  4. The solitary submission of the learned Counsel for the appellant is that the F.I.R. was lodged with the police after a period of 11 days and intimation was given to the Insurance Company after 33 days and since the respondent-complainant violated the terms and conditions of the Insurance Policy, he was not entitled for the benefits of insurance.

  5. The contention raised on behalf of the appellant-opposite party is not acceptable. The...

To continue reading

Request your trial