The Supreme Court observed that mere delay in intimating the insurance
company about the occurrence of the theft cannot be a ground to deny the
insurance claim.
In this case, the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, set aside
the claim of compensation on account of theft of vehicle on the ground that the
delay of 78 days in not informing the Insurance Company of the theft is fatal.
The complainant had purchased a Mahindra & Mahindra Major Jeep which was
stolen outside the office of a liquor shop, in which he was a partner. The
vehicle was insured with the |United India Insurance Co. Ltd. According to the
complainant, he informed the Insurance Company about the theft of vehicle on
phone, but the written complaint was made later. The complaint was allowed by
the District Consumer Redressal Forum and an award was passed to pay the
insured amount, i.e. Rs. 3,40,000/- to the complainant with 12% interest. The
appeal filed by the Insurance Company against the said order was dismissed by
the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission.
The appellant-complainant before the Apex Court relied on the judgment in
Gurshinder Singh Vs. Shriram General Insurance Company Ltd. & Anr., (2020)
11 SCC 612, in which the following observations were made: “when an
insured has lodged the FIR immediately after the theft of a vehicle occurred
and when the surveyors/investigators appointed by the insurance company have found
the claim of the theft to be genuine, then mere delay in intimating the
insurance company about the occurrence of the theft cannot be a ground to deny
the claim of the insured.”
The insurance company, on the other hand, contended that delay in lodging an
FIR is an important step in examining the claim of the appellant, since as per
the appellant himself, the report was lodged after 7 days of the incident.
Therefore, the claim filed by the complainant was rightly rejected by the
NCDRC.
The bench of Justices Hemant Gupta and V. Ramasubramanian noted that the
case of Insurance Company throughout was based upon delay in intimation to the
Insurance Company. Therefore, in respect of the argument that the FIR was
delayed, the said arguments need not be examined in this case, the court said
while allowing the appeal and restoring the order passed by the District Forum.
Case Name: Dharamender Vs. United India Insurance Co. Ltd.
Citation: LL 2021 SC 477