IMPORTANT POINT
A bonafide insurance claim cannot be repudiated by Insurance Company.

ORDER

Deepa Sharma, Presiding Member—The present revision petition has been field against the order dated 30th July, 2018 in appeal of the petitioner No.757/2018 challenging the order of the District Forum dated 12.4.2018 in CC/286/2017 of the respondent (hereinafter called “the complainant.”)

2. The admitted facts of the case are that the complainant is the registered owner of the subject vehicle HR-26 BH-2144 and owner of the valid insurance policy for the period 9th December, 2015 to 1st June, 2016.

3. His case is that he had handed over his car to a person, namely, Mr. Naveen who was dealing in the sale-purchaser of the old cars for the purpose of selling it. Naveen gave that vehicle to an unknown person for test drive who was interested in buying the subject car but that person ran away with the car and did not return it. An FIR No.22 dated 8.1.2016 was registered in police station Kharkhoda by Naveen. Car could not be traced and so the police closed the investigation. The complainant also filed a claim with the petitioner but his claim was repudiated on the ground that he had no insuranble interest in the subject vehicle since he had allegedly sold the said vehicle to Mr. Naveen who negligently had given the car to an unknown person.

4. Parties led their evidences before the District Forum. The complainant also furnished the affidavit in evidence of Mr. Naveen wherein he had stated that he had taken the car from the complainant for its sale and he had given it for test drive to an unknown person.

5. After relying on the testimonies of the parties and perusing it and also hearing the arguments of learned counsels, the District Forum reached to the conclusion that there was deficiency in service on the part of the petitioner and accordingly directed the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.3,80,000/- to the complainant within a period of 60 days and failing which pay an interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of passing of the order till its realization.

6. In the appeal, the petitioner raised the same contentions that the complainant had no insurable interest since he had sold the vehicle to Mr. Naveen who did not apply for transfer of the insurance policy in his name and that the incident did not come within the definition of “theft.” The State Commission dealt with all these arguments & contentions of the learned counsel and held as under: -

“4. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company has candidly stated that there is no evidence on record to prove that the complainant had sold the car to Naveen except that oral observation made by the official of the Insurance Company on the presumption that the car was handed over to Naveen, car dealer, to sell it. In view of this, the ground that the car was sold to Naveen, is repelled.

5. Now, the second ground of repudiation that the incident did not come under the definition of theft. In The Oriental Insurance Company Limited and another versus Rohit Kumar Gupta and others, 1994 (1) CPJ, 196, Hon’ble National Consumer Commission held as under:

We see no force at all in this contention. What would constitute the offence of theft is to be seen from the language used in the provisions of Section 379 of IPC. Illustration-D to that Section clearly and directly covers the contingency which has occurred in the present case, namely, the person who had been entrusted with an article or an item of goods dishonestly running away with the said article. Such being the legal position, we are of opinion that the Insurance Company should not have adopted such an attitude at all, but should have paid up the money covered by the insurance policy to the respondent. Inasmuch as that was not done, the State Commission rightly directed the Insurance Company to pay to the complainant the amount for which the car had been insured, namely, Rs.1 lakh.

6. In view of law enunciated above, the second ground of the repudiation is also rejected.

7. For the reasons recorded supra, the impugned order passed by the District Foru