IMPORTANT POINT
When there are no merits in the revision petition, the same is liable to be dismissed.

V.K. Jain, Presiding Member—The complainant/respondent owned a truck which he had got insured with the petitioner company for the period from 12.05.2014 to 11.05.2015. The aforesaid truck, loaded with goods, was taken from Bahraich on 17.07.2014. Thereafter, the complainant got no information about the truck and could not contact the driver. An FIR against the truck driver was therefore, lodged with the police. The complainant/respondent thereafter, lodged a claim with the insurance company which was rejected by the insurer.

Being aggrieved from the rejection of the claim, the complainant approached the concerned District Forum by way of a consumer complaint. The complaint was resisted by the insurer pleading inter-alia that no intimation of the loss was given to them by the insured. The District Forum vide its order dated 16.02.2016, allowed the complaint by directing the complainant to present the claim afresh with all necessary documents and directing the insurer to decide the claim within two months thereafter. The aforesaid order of the District Forum, having not been challenged by the insurer, became final and binding upon the parties.

2. After the aforesaid order of the District Forum, the insurer again rejected the claim vide letter dated 10.03.2016 which, to the extent it is relevant, reads as under:

We are in receipt of your letter dt. 22.02.2016 alongwith court order in regard to theft of your truck No. UP-42-AT-0757 in this connection we hereby reproduce the policy clause as below:

Notice shall be given in writing to the company immediately upon the occurrence of any accidental loss of damage and in the event of any claim and thereafter insured shall give all such information and assistance as the company shall require. Every letter claim writ summons and or process or copy whereof shall be forwarded to the company immediately on receipt by the insured shall have knowledge of any impending prosecution inquest of fatal injury in respect of any occurrences which may give rise to claim under this policy. In case of theft of criminal act which may be subject of a claim under this policy the insured shall give immediately notice to the police and co-operative with company in securing the convictism of the offender.

In view of the above, since you have not intimated the loss at branch office as such claim not tenable and we are closing the file treating as no claim.

3. Being aggrieved from the second rejection of the claim, the complainant again approached the concerned District Forum by way of a consumer complaint. The complaint was resisted by the insurer on several grounds including that the driver of the truck having committed criminal breach of trust, the loss was not covered under the insurance policy.

4. The District Forum having again allowed the complaint vide its order dated 09.01.2018 and having directed the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.15 lacs to the complainant alongwith interest @ 9% per annum and cost of litigation quantified at Rs.5,000/-, the petitioner approached the concerned State Commission by way of an appeal. The said appeal having been dismissed, the petitioner is before this Commission by way of this revision petition.

5. As noted by the State Commission, the Hon’ble Supreme Court clearly held in Galada Power and Telecommunication Limited Vs. United India Insurance Company Ltd. & Anr. (2016) 14 SCC 161: 2016 (6) Supreme 321, that the insurer cannot be allowed to travel beyond the repudiation letter issued by it and cannot be allowed to contest the claim on a ground which was not the ground of repudiation. Therefore, the petitioner cannot be allowed to urge a ground other than the ground that the loss was not intimated to it by the insured. Since the aforesaid ground had already been rejected by the District Forum by allowing the consumer complaint vide its first order dated 16.02.2016, the insurer could not have rejected the claim on that ground, it having accepted the order of t