##PAGE1##

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION KERALA

FIRST APPEAL NO. SC/32/A/84/2017

ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY PRESENT ADDRESS - DIVITION OFFICE,MANJERRI.,KERALA.

MANAGER, PRESENT ADDRESS - ORIENTAL INSURENCE,NEW DELHI,KERALA.

.......Appellant(s)

Versus

ADANAN.P.M PRESENT ADDRESS - PUTHUMANNIL HOUSE,KOTTAKKAL.P.O,KERALA.

.......Respondent(s)

BEFORE:

SRI.RADHAKRISHNAN.K.R , PRESIDING MEMBER

FOR THE APPELLANT:

NEMO

FOR THE RESPONDENT:

NEMO

DATED: 27/03/2026

ORDER

KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

APPEAL No.84/2017

ORDER DATED : 27.03.2026

(Against the order in C.C.No.351/2015 on the files of DCDRC, Malappuram)

PRESENT:

HON’BLE JUSTICE SRI. B. SUDHEENDRA KUMAR : PRESIDENT

SRI. AJITH KUMAR D. : JUDICIAL MEMBER

SRI. K.R. RADHAKRISHNAN : MEMBER

APPELLANTS:

1.

The Manager, Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., Divisional Office, Jaseela Complex, Nilambur Road, Manjeri

2.

Manager, Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., A25-27, Asaf Ali Road, New Delhi, 110002, represented by its Deputy Manager, Third Party

Hub, Ulloor, Trivandrum.

(by Adv. V. Manikantan Nair)

Vs.

RESPONDENT:

Adnan P.M., S/o Muhammed, Puthumannil House, Kottakkal P.O., Malappuram represented by Power of Attorney Holder, Abdussammad, S/o Muhammed Haji, Puthumannil House, Kottakkal P.O., Malappuram

(by Adv. Priya P. Pillai, Amicus Curiae)

ORDER

SRI. K.R. RADHAKRISHNAN :MEMBER

This is an appeal filed under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986,

by the opposite parties in C.C.No.351/2015 on the files of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Malappuram (for short, the ‘District Commission’). As per the order dated 31.10.2016, the District Commission allowed the complaint and directed the opposite parties to pay Rs.83,954/-(Rupees Eighty Three Thousand Nine Hundred and fifty Four only) as the value of the vehicle to the complainant together with Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand only) as compensation for the mental agony and Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand only) as costs of the proceedings. They were directed to pay the amount within 30 days from the date of receipt of the copy of the order failing which the amount will carry interest @12% per annum from the date of the order till realisation. Aggrieved by the said order, the opposite parties have filed

this appeal.

2. The brief details of the complaint are as follows:

The complainant is the owner of Bajaj Pulsar motorcycle bearing registration

number KL55N9975, which was insured with the opposite parties. The vehicle was stolen on 16.07.2014 when it was parked near Kottakkal Co-operative Hospital. The vehicle could not be traced out despite thorough search and so the complainant reported the matter to the Kottakkal Police Station and a crime was registered as Crime No.660/2014. The investigation was conducted for about six months and the vehicle could not be traced out. Hence, the investigation was stopped thereafter. The

complainant submitted copy of the FIR and all other documents to the opposite parties for getting the claim. Despite submission of all the documents, the claim was not settled by the opposite parties. Hence, the complainant filed this complaint claiming the Insured’s Declared Value (IDV) of the vehicle amounting to Rs.83,954/-(Rupees Eighty Three Thousand Nine Hundred and Fifty four only) with interest, compensation

and costs.

3. Notice was issued to the opposite parties who entered appearance and

filed a joint version. They admitted having covered the motorcycle, vide policy No.442700/31/2014/23793 for the period from 20.12.2013 to 19.12.2014 for an IDV of Rs.84,954/-(Rupees Eighty Four Thousand Nine Hundred and Fifty Four only). However, the vehicle number was not given to the opposite parties at the time of taking the insurance policy. Hence, the opposite parties were not in a position to confirm the insurance policy of the vehicle KL 55 N 9975. They contended that the complainant did not inform the matter of theft of the vehicle to them and he