Decided on March 20,2012

Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd Respondents


- (1.)THE complainant's Indigo Car bearing Regd. No. PB -71 -0112, duly insured with OP, met with an accident on 25.9.2009 in the area of Police Station, Kathgarh, District SBS Nagar. An F.I.R. No. 54, dated 26.9.2009 under Sections 279/338/427, IPC was registered at P.S. Kathgarh. The vehicle was taken into possession by the police. Intimation about the accident was given to OP through its representative Sh.Harpreet Singh on 26.9.2009. The car was got released on Supardarifrom the Court of S.D.J.M., Balachaur on 10.10.2009. The vehicle was taken to M/s. Joshi Auto Zone (Pvt.) Ltd. an authorized dealer, for necessary repair. The Surveyor of OP Company inspected the vehicle and asked the dealer to repair it. The car was repaired accordingly and a bill of repair was raised to the tune of Rs. 2,44,535 and installation of new auto battery of Rs. 3,900. The complainant approached OP to make payment but they kept on delaying the matter on one pretext or the other. Ultimately, the complainant paid the amount of Rs. 2,47,435 from his own pocket. However, the OP instead of passing his claim, repudiated it, on flimsy grounds that the intimation regarding the accident and consequential loss to the vehicle had been given after the delay of 69 days.
(2.)OP filed reply and admitted the issuance of insurance policy. It is denied thatSh. Harpreet Singh is the representative of OP Company. It is submitted that complainant gave information about the alleged accident to the Insurance Company on 3.12.2009, whereupon a Surveyor was appointed, who inspected the vehicle and submitted his report. As per Surveyor's report, the liability of the Insurance Company was Rs. 1,54,000 subject to terms and conditions of the policy. It is also submitted that complainant has breached ConditionNo. 1 of the Insurance Policy as the intimation was given the OP - Insurance Company about the alleged loss on 3.12.2009 i.e. after a delay of 69 days, which caused great prejudice to the Company to get the vehicle surveyed and assess the loss. It is denied that complainant paid Rs. 2,44,535 for repair and Rs. 3,900 for new auto battery. Denying rest of the allegations and pleading no deficiency in service, OP prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
(3.)PARTIES led evidence in support of their contentions.
We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and have also perused the record.

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.