Skip to main content

Non-lodging of FIR within 7 days in vehicle theft fatal - Consumer Forum

A man's plea seeking claim from an insurance company for loss of his vehicle parts has been dismissed by a consumer forum, which said failure to lodge an FIR for a "period of seven days in case of theft of a vehicle is fatal".

While rejecting the plea of Delhi resident Kishan Chand, against National Insurance Co Ltd, West Delhi District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, presided by Bimla Makin, said, "There were serious doubts about the genuineness of this claim".

"Non-lodging of the FIR for a period of seven days in the case of theft of a vehicle is fatal and adversely affects the rights of the Opposite Party (insurance company) and under facts and circumstances of this case, there are serious doubts about the genuineness of this claim.

"Hence...We hold that complaint is time barred and even otherwise there was no deficiency of service on the part of the Opposite Party," the forum said.

It noted there were lots of unanswered queries regarding loss and recovery of vehicle.

"It is difficult to believe that under what circumstances the vehicle was stolen and how it was recovered by the complainant himself in another state without any assistance from anybody," the forum said.

The forum also noted that there was no witness of recovery of this vehicle from the place from where it is alleged to have been recovered.

"...Story put forward by the complainant is not believable per se and added with it is the fact that for seven days neither the police nor the insurance company was informed of the theft of the vehicle," it said.

Chand had told the forum that he had purchased a Maruti Omni fitted with CNG kit for commercial purpose to be used as taxi.

The vehicle was insured with the insurance company, effective from December 29, 2006 to December 28, 2007 and during this period it got stolen on November 23, 2007 and an FIR was recorded on November 30, 2007.

Later, however, he found the vehicle abandoned at Tawadu, Haryana with all its important parts stolen.

The complainant got the vehicle repaired and spent Rs one lakh towards repairs/ installation of stolen parts and subsequently lodged a claim with the the company on December 24, 2007.

Inspite of repeated visits, his claim was not settled, he said, adding that, thereafter, he approached the forum seeking a direction to the company to pay Rs lakh.

The insurance company, however, contended before the forum that no FIR regarding the theft was lodged at the police station within seven days and no intimation was given to it.

Article referred: http://www.business-standard.com/article/pti-stories/non-lodging-of-fir-within-7-days-in-vehicle-theft-fatal-114082500631_1.html

Comments

Most viewed this month

The recovery of vehicles by the financier not an offence - SC

Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 8907  of 2009 Anup Sarmah (Petitioner) Vs Bhola Nath Sharma & Ors.(Respondents) The petitioner submitted that  respondents-financer had forcibly taken away the vehicle financed by them and  illegally deprived the petitioner from its lawful possession  and  thus,  committed  a crime. The complaint filed by the petitioner had been  entertained  by  the Judicial Magistrate (Ist Class), Gauhati (Assam) in Complaint Case  No.  608 of 2009, even directing the interim custody of the vehicle (Maruti  Zen)  be given to the petitioner vide order dated  17.3.2009.  The respondent on approaching the Guwahati High  Court against this order, the hon'ble court squashed the criminal  proceedings  pending   before  the  learned Magistrate. After hearing both sides, the Hon'ble Supreme Court decided on 30th...

Valuation Report of Jewellery once made is effective for Four Assessment Years

The division Bench of the Delhi High Court in Pr.Commissioner of Wealth Tax vs. Raghu Hari Dalmia held that a valuation report made by a registered valuer once adopted shall be in effect for four assessment years unless an event has occurred whereby the value is increased or decreased. The High Court made it clear that the event of “search” under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 cannot compel the assessee to undertake a fresh valuation.

Mere Agreement To Sell The Leased Property To Tenant Would Not Terminate Landlord-Tenant Relationship

In CIVIL APPEAL Nos. 1237­1238 OF 2019, Dr. H.K. Sharma vs Shri Ram Lal, the tenant had objected against the eviction suit filed by the landlord, claiming that the landlord-tenant relationship between them had ceased to exist by virtue of an agreement for sale entered between them and that he has already paid some money in advance based on the agreement. The tenant contented as the landlord-tenant relationship did not exist, the landlord cannot evict him. The matter went through various forums and finally landed before the Supreme Court in appeal. The Supreme Court referring to the judgment in Shah Mathuradas Maganlal & Co. vs. Nagappa Shankarappa Malage & Ors., held that in the instant case the lease agreement included no clauses on the fate of the tenancy. A fortiori, the parties did not intend to surrender the tenancy rights despite entering into an agreement of sale of the tenanted property. In other words, if the parties really intended to surrender their tenancy ...