IMPORTANT POINT
Delay - District Commission has wrongly dismissed the complaint on the ground of delay without perusing the vital documents available on the record.

ORDER

Daya Chaudhary, President—The appellant/complainant Kuldeep Singh has filed the present appeal under Section 41 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (in short the ‘Act’) to challenge the impugned order dated 12.11.2021 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Sangrur (hereinafter referred as the “District Commission”) in C.C. No.489 of 2018, whereby the complaint filed by appellant-complainant was dismissed.

2. It would be apposite to mention that hereinafter the parties will be referred, as have been arrayed before the District Commission.

3. The brief facts of the case as made out by complainant in the complaint which are necessary for disposal of the present appeal are that the complainant filed a Consumer Complaint before the District Commission with the averments that he got insured his Truck/Tipper bearing No.PB-11BK-0753 from the OP for the period with effect from 17.06.2016 to 16.06.2017 through Mahindra & Mahindra Finance Company Limited. Further it was mentioned that on 05.05.2017 some problem developed in the vehicle at a place near Samana Kanchiyan, Near Rubber Factory, Bhawanigarh and it was parked by locking with the key. But on the very next day i.e. 06.05.2017 at about 7.00 a.m. the complainant reached alongwith a mechanic on the spot and found that the vehicle was missing from the place where it was parked. He made all possible efforts and thereafter approached to the Police of Police Station Bhawanigarh and a written complaint was submitted which was duly acknowledged by the police. The intimation of this incident was also immediately given to Mahindra & Mahindra Finance Company from which the vehicle was got financed. On the basis of complaint FIR No.88 dated 02.06.2017 was registered under Section 379 IPC at Police Station Bhawanigarh. The Surveyor was appointed by the OP who visited the house of the complainant and got certain documents alongwith signatures of the complainant. As per the case of the complainant all the documents were supplied alongwith original keys. Inspite of request made by the complainant and on the assurance given by the Surveyor, the claim was not released. The police filed the untraced report before the competent Court which was duly accepted by the Presiding Officer, National Lok Adalat, Sangrur on 10.03.2018. The complainant approached the OP but his claim was repudiated vide letter dated 24.04.2018. Alleging a case of ‘deficiency of service’ on the part of OP in the complaint the complainant prayed for award of an amount of Rs.12,50,000/- alongwith interest, compensation as well as litigation expenses.

4. On issuing notice in the complaint to the respondent the reply was filed wherein certain preliminary objections were raised and averments made in the complaint were also denied.

5. The District Commission by considering the averments made in the complaint, reply thereof as well as arguments raised by both the sides ultimately dismissed the complaint vide order dated 12.11.2021 on the ground that there was a delay of 26 days in lodging of the FIR and the owner of the truck did not inform the police officials as well as the insurance company immediately whereas it was required to be intimated without any delay.

6. Said impugned order dated 12.11.2021 passed by the District Commission is under challenge in the appeal filed by the appellant/complainant by raising a number of grounds.

7. Mr. Sanjeev Goyal, Advocate learned counsel for the appellant submits that the District Commission has dismissed the complaint only on the ground that there was a delay of 26 days in giving intimation to the police whereas the intimation was given on the next day only i.e. 06.05.2017 and there was no delay in intimation. This fact was duly acknowledged by the police which is clear from the stamp put by the police on the letter. It was proved on record that the police was timely approached. Learned counsel also submits that the police filed cancellation report after investi