BHARTI AXA GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs. MONU YADAV
LAWS(P&H)-2014-7-153
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Decided on July 16,2014

BHARTI AXA GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Appellant
VERSUS
Monu Yadav Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) Challenge in this petition is to the Award dated 09.04.2014 (Annexure P-5) passed by the Permanent Lok Adalat (Public Utility Services), Gurgaon-respondent No. 2, whereby petitioner-company has been directed to pay Rs. 7,89,000/- to the applicant-respondent No. 1 within a period of 40 days on completion of formalities/requirements.
(2.) Ms. Monu Yadav-respondent No. 1 made an application under Section 22-C of the Legal Services Authority Act, 1987, before the Permanent Lok Adalat, Gurgaon, stating that she was owner of Tata Safari vehicle, bearing registration No. HR-26-BL-2117. The said vehicle was insured with Bharti AXA General Insurance Company Ltd.-petitioner vide policy/cover note No. 31444632 for the period from 17.04.2012 to 16.04.2013. On 18.04.2012, she parked her vehicle in Jasrotia Hospital, Hari Nagar, New Delhi. When she came out from the hospital on 20.04.2012, the said vehicle was found missing and had been stolen by some unknown person. The information regarding theft of vehicle was immediately given to the local Police, whereupon FIR No. 142 dated 20.04.2012, under Section 379 IPC was registered at Police Station Hari Nagar, New Delhi. The police could not trace the vehicle and ultimately, an untraced report was filed on 26.05.2012. Despite completion of all the requisite formalities by respondent No. 1, the petitioner-company did not settle her claim with regard to the aforesaid vehicle.
(3.) The claim of respondent No. 1 was resisted by the petitioner-company on the ground that even though the vehicle was insured with the company, but the information regarding theft was given after a delay of 54 days. Hence, there was violation of condition No. 1 of the insurance policy, as timely investigation could not be conducted for the aforesaid reason. As per the report given by M/s. Vikas Kumar & Association, the applicant-respondent No. 1 had given a fabricated cover note without physical examination of the vehicle in question. This vehicle was got insured by concealing the fact that it had already been lost.;


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