9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (10) TMI 1663X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h have been otherwise proved to be genuine. It needs no emphasis that the Consumer Protection Act aims at providing better protection of the interest of consumers. It is a beneficial legislation that deserves liberal construction. This laudable object should not be forgotten while considering the claims made under the Act. In the instant case, the Appellant has given cogent reasons for the delay of 8 days in informing the Respondent about the incident. The Investigator had verified the theft to be genuine and the payment of Rs. 7,85,000/- towards the claim was approved by the Corporate Claims Manager, which, in our opinion, is just and proper. The National Commission, therefore, is not justified in rejecting the claim of the Appellant witho ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ndent-company. 3. Pursuant to the said claim, an Investigator was appointed by the Respondent-company, who, after verification, confirmed the factum of theft. Consequently, the Corporate Claims Manager approved an amount of Rs. 7,85,000/- for the said claim of the Appellant. Thereafter, the Appellant made several requests and demands to the Respondent-company, inter alia, seeking speedy processing and disposal of his insurance claim. Finally, the Appellant served a legal notice, dated 09.08.2011, to the Respondent-company. However, the Respondent-company repudiated the insurance claim of the Appellant citing breach of Condition No. 1, i.e. immediate information about the loss/theft of the vehicle. 4. Being aggrieved, the Appellant filed com ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... with the police while visiting many cities in Rajasthan for the search of the said vehicle and returned to his village on 30.03.2010 and lodged the insurance claim on 31.03.2010 before the Respondent-company. The Appellant has assigned cogent reasons for the delay of 8 days in lodging the complaint. The National Commission has dismissed the petition filed by the Appellant without taking into consideration the reasons assigned for the delay. It is argued that the Investigator appointed by the Respondent has verified the factum of theft and that the Corporate Claims Manager approved the report of Investigator, thereby recommending the payment of Rs. 7,85,000/- towards claim. 7. On the other hand, the learned Counsel appearing for the Respond ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed his village on 30.03.2010. The Appellant had also filed a similar affidavit before the State Commission explaining the reasons for the delay in informing theft of the vehicle. 10. Condition No. 1 of the Insurance Policy states that notice shall be given in writing to the company immediately upon the occurrence of any accidental loss or damage in the event of any claim and thereafter the insured has to give all such information and assistance as the company may require. 11. It is common knowledge that a person who lost his vehicle may not straightaway go to the Insurance Company to claim compensation. At first, he will make efforts to trace the vehicle. It is true that the owner has to intimate the insurer immediately after the theft of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
