BABU LAL Vs. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -ADMITTEDLY, appellant obtained an insurance policy in respect of his car against risk of theft and accident. During the subsistence of policy the vehicle was stolen on 22. 4. 2001. The son of the appellant lodged a report with the police but the vehicle could not be traced. Consequently, he filed the claim with the respondent. No decision was taken by the Insurance Company because of non-cooperation of the appellant in not submitting the requisite documents. Consequently, he filed the instant complaint before the District Forum under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act seeking indemnification of the loss suffered by him.

(2.) VIDE impugned order dated 1. 9. 2003 passed by the District Forum, the complaint was dismissed firstly, on the ground that there was no explanation of delay of four days in not lodging FIR and secondly, no evidence was placed on record by the appellant and, therefore, it cannot be ascertained whether the vehicle stolen has been traced by the appellant or not. Feeling aggrieved, the appellant has preferred this appeal.

(3.) THE impugned order is an ex parte order. Ordinarily the affidavit filed by a party has to be deemed as evidence in support of claim of a party unless it is controverted or contradicted effectively or specifically. The perusal of the impugned order shows that the appellant did not produce any insurance policy and, therefore, it could not be ascertained as to what was the insurance amount nor has he produced any relevant record. The appellant has produced photo copies of these documents before us and states that he had produced it before the District Forum but it was not taken on record.