New Delhi District Commission Holds Bajaj Allianz Insurance Co. Liable For Repudiating Genuine Claim On Delay Ground, Awards Compensation

Brief Facts:

Anil Kumar (“Complainant”) owned a truck insured by Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company (“Insurance Company”) covering the period from 09.03.2010 to 08.03.2011, with a sum insured of Rs. 11,00,000. Anil Kumar paid a premium of Rs. 22,978 for this insurance.

Unfortunately, on 01.04.2010, the complainant’s truck disappeared suddenly. Despite his efforts, the Complainant couldn’t establish contact with the truck’s driver. Various authorities, including the Delhi Police and local authorities in Punjab, were approached to file a First Information Report (FIR) regarding the missing truck, but they declined to do so. After a long delay and several efforts made by the Complainant, an FIR was finally registered in Chhajli Police Station, Sangrur (Punjab). The complainant also made a claim from the insurance company for the missing truck. However, the insurance company repudiated his claim, citing an alleged breach of conditions related to the delayed reporting of the incident. Feeling aggrieved, the complainant filed a consumer complaint in the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-VI, New Delhi.

In response, the insurance company contended that the complainant’s claim was barred by limitation due to the delay in filing the FIR and that there was no deficiency in their services. They argued that there was no consumer relationship under the Consumer Protection Act between the complainant and the insurance company after the claim had been repudiated. The insurance company further alleged that the complainant filed the complaint for unlawful gain, indicating avarice for money and accused him of not approaching the case with clean hands, citing concealed material facts.

Observations by the Commission:

The District Commission, not being satisfied with the contentions of the insurance company, noted that the Complainant had made genuine efforts to report the incident promptly. Several attempts to lodge an FIR had been hindered by various authorities, including the Delhi Police and local authorities in Punjab, who refused to register the case. Furthermore, the District Commission referred to the judgment of the Supreme Court of India in Jaina Construction Company Vs. Oriental Insurance Company 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 154, wherein it was held that a claim cannot be repudiated solely on the ground of delay. This legal standpoint was further reinforced by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in Gurshinder Singh Vs. Shriram General Insurance Co. Ltd. Civil Appeal No. 653 of 2020.

In light of these legal precedents and a thorough examination of the evidence and pleadings of both parties, the District Commission held that there was no reasonable basis to reject the Complainant’s claim. Consequently, the District Commission directed the Insurance Company to pay the claim amount of Rs. 11,00,000/- to the complainant. Moreover, the District Commission awarded a compensation of Rs. 50,000/- to the complainant, for the mental harassment and agony he had endured throughout the ordeal. An additional sum of Rs. 15,000/- was granted as litigation expenses. The insurance company was instructed to make these payments within six weeks from the date of receiving the Commission’s order.

Case Title: Anil Kumar vs The Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company

Case No.: CC/705/2013

Advocate for the Complainant: N.A.

Advocate for the Respondent: N.A.

Click Here To Read/Download Order