के न्द्रीय सूचना आयोग Central Information Commission बाबा गंगनाथ मागग, मुननरका

Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka नई निल्ली, New Delhi – 110067 File No: CIC/NIACL/C/2024/619323 Danish Jamil ….निकायतकताग /Complainant VERSUS बनाम PIO The New India Assurance Company Ltd., 4th Floor, Surya Tower, 108, The Mall, Ludhiana – 141001 ….प्रनतवािीगण /Respondent Date of Hearing : 17.11.2025 Date of Decision : 19.11.2025 INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Vinod Kumar Tiwari Relevant facts emerging from complaint:

RTI application filed on : 23.01.2024 CPIO replied on : 22.02.2024 First appeal filed on : 18.03.2024 First Appellate Authority’s order : Not on record

2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 09.05.2024 Information sought:

1. The Complainant filed an RTI application dated 23.01.2024 (online)

seeking the following information:

“My name is Mr. Danish Jamil director of M/s. Indian Trails Sourcing Services Pvt. Ltd. Our vehicle bearing registration No.: BR-06PF-2355 is insured by The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. under policy No.: 36070331220300000132 which is effective from 06.04.22 to 05.04.23. An own damage claim bearing ref. No.: 36070331220390000279 was lodged under the policy for the date of loss as 05.06.2022.

I will request you to kindly share the following:

1. Copy of Spot Survey report

2. Copy of final survey & loss assessment report

3. Copy of investigation report (if any)

4. The reason as why our above claim is still pending for the settlement?

Kindly find attached the board resolution authorizing me for filing RTI, copy of GST registration Certificate & a copy of policy for your kind consideration.”

2. The CPIO furnished a reply to the Complainant on 22.02.2024 stating as under:

“We are sending hard copy through Regd. post as the information sought by you is bulky exceeding mail capacity. hence we are sending through regd. post”

3. Being dissatisfied, the Complainant filed a First Appeal dated 18.03.2024.

The FAA order is not on record.

4. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, Complainant approached the Commission with the instant Complaint on the ground of non-receipt of reply from the CPIO through registered post till date.

5. A written submission dated 07.11.2025 filed by Shri Pawan Kumar, CPIO (addressed to the Complainant) is taken on record. Contents of the same are reproduced below:

Respected Sir, This has reference to your appeal in Central Information Commission, New Delhi, we wish to inform you that have already provided the desired information through Regd. Post vide postal receipt No. RP186672437 da 27/02/2024 our dispatch number 45 (photo copy of the receipt is enclosed herewith). Please also note that the dispatch never returned to us as undelivered.

If you want again the same information, we will supply within 15 days.

This is for your information please.

Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:

The following were present:-

Complainant: Not present.

Respondent: Shri Pawan Kumar, Manager-cum-CPIO present through video conference.

6. Proof of having served a copy of Second Appeal/Complaint on Respondent while filing the same in CIC on 09.05.2024 is not available on record.

7. The Complainant remained absent during hearing despite prior intimation.

8. The Respondent by placing reliance on his written submission stated that timely response along with copy of relevant information has been provided to the Complainant via speed-post which was never received back undelivered. On being queried by the Commission, he confirmed that information documents are voluminous, which runs into more than 60 pages. He apprised the Bench that after receipt of hearing notice, he tried to contact the Complainant on his mobile phone but there was no response. Lastly, he added that their office has an internal DAK system for each Regional Office and he volunteered to send a copy of complete requested documents to their Regional Office of New Delhi and thereafter, ask the Complainant to collect the same physically from Delhi office.

Decision

9. The Commission after adverting to the facts and ci