STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA FIRST APPEAL NO. SC/6/A/669/2022 NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD.

PRESENT ADDRESS - SCO 36-37, SECTOR 17-A, CHANDIGARH. ,HARYANA.

.......Appellant(s)

Versus UMAR MOHD.

PRESENT ADDRESS - VILLAGE RITHODA, TEHSIL NUH, ,HARYANA.

.......Respondent(s)

BEFORE:

T P S MANN , PRESIDENT MANJULA , MEMBER FOR THE APPELLANT:

SHRI VINOD CHAUDHRIALONGWITH MS. GEETA CHAUDHRI, COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANT.

FOR THE RESPONDENT:

DR. KIRANDEEP KAUR ALONGWITH WITH SHRI AFJAL HUSSAIN, COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT. DATED: 10/11/2025

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, HARYANA, PANCHKULA First Appeal No.669 of 2022 Date of Filing:17.11.2022 Reserve for Orders:-27.10.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 10.11.2025 New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Branch Office at Old Railway Road, Gurugram, District Gurugram, now through its Manager, New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Regional Office, SCO 36-37, Sector 17-A, Chandigarh.

…..Opposite Party/Appellant Versus Umar Mohd S/o Akbar, resident of Village Rithoda, Tehsil Nuh, District Nuh.

…..Complainant-Respondent CORAM: Hon’ble Mr. Justice T.P.S Mann, President.

Mrs.Manjula, Member Argued by:-Shri Vinod Chaudhrialongwith Ms. Geeta Chaudhri, counsel for the appellant.

Dr. Kirandeep Kaur alongwith with Shri Afjal Hussain, counsel for the respondent.

O R D E R

T.P.S. MANN J.

Opposite Party-Appellant-New India Assurance Co. Ltd.,has filed the instant appeal under Section 41 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 for challenging the order dated 21.09.2022passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Nuh whereby complaint filed by the complainant was allowed observing:-

“To do complete and substantial justice between the parties, the opposite party is directed to pay Rs.18,00,000/- (Insured Declared Value of the vehicle) to the complainant subject to submission of subrogation letter, no dues certificate from the financer/loan account statement of insured vehicle, if any, alongwith Forms 26, 28, 29 and 30 (A) to the insurance company within 30 days. Besides, the opposite party is directed to pay Rs.10,000/- as compensation towards pain, mental agony and litigation expenses. The Opposite Party shall pay the said amount within 45 days from today, failing which the insurer shall be liable to pay interest on the said amount @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the complaint till its actual realization. The complaint is disposed of accordingly.”

2. The brief facts of the case are thatthe complainant is registered owner of the truck bearing regd. No.RJ-14GG/4472 Model-2015. The vehicle was insured with the opposite party w.e.f. 25.08.2020 to 24.08.2021. Unfortunately on 28.04.2021, the vehicle was stolen when its driver Sakrulla parked the vehicle in his village. FIR No.352 of 2021 was lodged in PS Kama. The complainant also informed the insurance company about the theft of the vehicle. The complainant lodged his claim. Surveyor was appointed, who investigated the matter. The complainant had completed all the formalities of the documents required by the OP. The complainant requested the OP to settle the claim, but, OP refused to indemnify the claim of the complainant. Thus there was deficiency in service on the part of the OP.

3. Upon notice, OP filed written statement, wherein severalpreliminary objections about maintainability of complaint,cause of action, misrepresentation and concealment/distortion of facts etc. were raised and requested the District Consumer Commission to dismiss the complaint.

4. It was further submitted that the complainant did not intimate in writing the alleged theft loss to the insurance company. The subject vehicle was allegedly stolen in the night of 28.04.2021. The complainant did not submit the requisite theft related documents and statements of self- witnesses. The complainant had breached many policy terms and conditions viz. 1, 5, 7 and 8 besides the basic cardinal principles of insurance viz. breach of good faith, misrepresentation, law of indemn