ORDER

JUSTICE V.K.JAIN, PRESIDING MEMBER (ORAL)

1. The complainant who owned a Renault Duster vehicle bearing registration no.

CH-01-AZ-0240 got the same insured with the petitioner company for the period from 25.09.2014 to 24.09.2015. In the night intervening 8^th/9^th January 2015, the aforesaid vehicle when parked outside the house of the complainant, was stolen. The matter was immediately reported to the police as well as to the petitioner company. A claim was then lodged with the petitioner company for a payment in terms of the insurance policy taken by the complainant. The claim was however, repudiated vide letter dated

01.06.2015 which, to the extent it is relevant, reads as under:

As per FIR vide no. 13/2015 dated 09.01.2015, we have not found any information that the 2^nd key of vehicle was lying inside vehicle in a hand bag at the time of Theft-loss. This was neither reported to police nor to us at the time of lodging the FIR. The police lost an opportunity to timely alert the Check-posts or Entry-Exit Points of Chandigarh with details of the vehicle.

Further we find that the practice of leaving the ignition key inside the vehicle to be an enhancement of risk and raises a further question as to why should anyone leave the vehicle’s ignition key inside the vehicle when it could have been easily carried along and kept under safe-custody. As if any moment 2^nd key is required for whatsoever reason the 2^nd key is not available as the vehicle is locked.

Leaving the vehicle’s ignition key inside the car in a hand bag kept the vehicle in drivable condition for the miscreants by just breaking the glass and hence, you will surely agree that this action had not only increased the risk of the vehicle being stolen many folds, but also directly contributed to the failure to ensure security and safeguard of the vehicle.

This fact was nowhere recorded in the FIR and was disclosed only upon probing by the independent investigation agency on the background of the theft. Policy Condition – 4 clearly lays down that it is binding on the insured to take all measures to ensure that the vehicle is safeguarded at all times and the event of leaving the vehicle’s ignition key has breached the said condition. “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 attended without proper precautions being taken to prevent further damage or loss and if the 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 risk.”

Being aggrieved from the rejection of the claim, the complainant approached the concerned District Forum by way of a complaint.

2. The complaint was resisted by the petitioner company primarily on the ground that the complainant was negligent, he having kept second key of the vehicle in the vehicle itself, thereby violating condition no. 4 of the insurance policy taken by him.

3. The District Forum vide its order dated 06.01.2016, allowed the complaint. Being aggrieved, the petitioner approached the concerned State Commission by way of an appeal. Vide impugned order dated 22.04.2016, the appeal filed by the petitioner company was dismissed. Being still dissatisfied, the petitioner is before us by way of this revision petition.

4. Condition no. 4 of the insurance policy on which reliance is placed by the petitioner company, reads as under:

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 of employee of the insured. In the event of any accident or breakdown, th