SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(Online)(Guj) 448

GUJARAT STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, AHMEDABAD
string, string
Insurance Company – Appellant
Versus
Punil Keshavbhai Godhaniya – Respondent
Consumer Complaint No. 17 of 205



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Shri V. P. Nanavaty
For the Respondents: Shri H.K. Thakor

The insured's noncompliance with policy terms results in non-entitlement to full claims; partial payment based on compliance is justified.

Headnote:The Insurance Company appealed against the order of CDRF for failing to settle a claim related to car theft, citing lack of documentation from the complainant. The court found insufficient justification for the discrepancies in the claims process. The initial order was modified to award 75% of the insured declared value of the vehicle, excluding emotional damages.

Table of Content
1. insurance claim initiated due to vehicle theft. (Para 1 , 2)
2. insurance company cites noncompliance for declining claim. (Para 3 , 4)
3. defense emphasizes document discrepancies to challenge claim. (Para 5 , 6 , 7)
4. court evaluates evidence against insurance compliance policy. (Para 8)
5. court rules on partial allowance of appeal. (Para 9 , 10)

1. This Appeal is by the Insurance Company.

2. The Respondent Punil Keshavbhai Godhaniya filed a Consumer Complainant No. 17 of 205 with CDRF, Porbandar, alleging that his car Nishan Micra DLX V. Premium, bearing registration No. GJ 25 J. 0551 was insured with the Opponent Bharti Axa General Insurance Company Limited under the policy period from 28.12.2013 to 27.12.2014. His brother - in - law Sureshbhai Vejabhai Karavadara, parked it in the parking of Silver Oak Hotel, Rajivgandhi Cross Road, Indor, M.P. on 23.12.2014 but therefrom was found missing from 8.30 p.m. on 24.12.2014 to 8.00 a.m. of 25.12.2014, the complaint of theft was given by his brother - inlaw with Bhavarkuva Police Station, it filed final report on 28.3.2015, the theft having not been traced. The complaint sent copy of the said report and also of FIR to the Insurance Company, to which also supplied original RC Book, two Keys, NOC of Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company, duplicate copies of document sent to Shri Pravinbhai Radhav, RTO Form No. 35(2) and detailed history of the vehicle. The Insurance Company did not even then pay the claim amount nor despite the notice dated 26.5.2015. Therefore, for this deficiency he claims (1) Rs. 5,82,214 with 18% interest from the date of the complaint, (2) Rs. 15,000 towards mental pain and (3) Rs. 5,000 towards costs.

3. The defence vide written version before the Forum is that the complaint is not maintainable he having not provided required documents despite repeated requests. The policy was subject to terms and conditions thereof, liability of the company arises subject to the compliance of the provisions of the M. V. Act and terms and condition of the policy. The material thereof are: ˜1. Notice shall be given in writing to the Company immediately upon the occurrence of any accident or loss or damage and in the event of any claim and thereafter the insured shall give all such information and assistance as the Company shall require. Every letter claim writ summons and / or process shall be forwarded to the Company immediately on receipt by the Insured. Notice shall be given in writing to the Company immediately the insured shall have knowledge of any impending. Prosecution Inquest Fatal Injury in respect of any occurrence which may give rise to a claim under this policy. In case of theft or other criminal act, which may be subject of claim under this Policy the insured shall give immediate notice to the Police and co - operate with the Company in securing the conviction of the offender' and ˜4. The insured shall take all reasonable steps to safeguard the vehicle from loss or damage and to maintain it in efficient condition and the company shall have at all times free and full access to examine the vehicle or any part thereof or any driver or employee of the Insured. In the event of any accident or breakdown the vehicle shall not be left unattended without proper precaution being taken to prevent further damage Joss and if vehicle be driven before the necessary repairs are effected any extension of the damage or any further damage to the vehicle shall be entirely at the Insured's own risk.' The insured intimated about the said theft of the car to opponent Insurance Company on 25.12.2014 at about 12.39 hours, thereafter, the Insurance Company appointed claim - Investigation Bureau of Ahmedabad who carried out investigation in detail and demanded / informed to insured the complainant through E - mail on 2.4.2015 and specifically by the Insurance Company on 25.4.2015 by RPAD but there was no proper response from the insured for supply of required documen















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top