Insurance claim can’t be denied on technical ground – Apex Court
D.D:- May 20, 2022
Supreme Court Observed in recent judgement (Gurmel Singh Vs Branch Manager, National Insurance Co. Ltd) that there is no dispute that the vehicle belonging to the appellant was insured with the respondent company. It is also not in dispute that a FIR has been registered on the very day on which the vehicle was stolen.
The RTO denied issuing the duplicate certified copy of the certificate of registration, on the ground that details regarding registration certificate on the computer has been locked. The insurance claim has not been settled mainly on the ground that the appellant has not produced either the original certificate of registration or even the duplicate certified copy. The appellant has been wrongly denied the insurance claim.
Facts – Appellant / complainant registered owner of the Truck , vehicle was insured with the respondent insurance company for the period from 22.08.2012 to 21.08.2013. The appellant also paid a sum of Rs. 28,880/to the respondent towards premium. On 2324.03.2013 in the midnight, the said vehicle was stolen.
A FIR was immediately lodged, which was registered as FIR No. 57/13. On the same day, the complainant also informed the insurance company as well as the Regional Transport Office (RTO) regarding the theft of the Truck. That after giving information regarding theft, the appellant submitted all the documents sought by the insurance company, but the insurance company failed to settle the claim.
That being aggrieved by the delay in settling the claim, the appellant filed the consumer complaint before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission. The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission issued direction that the appellant would furnish duplicate certified copy of the certificate of registration of Truck to the insurance company within a month and that the insurance company within a month after receiving the same would settle the claim as per the terms and conditions of the insurance policy.
It is the case on behalf of the appellant that in compliance of the order passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, the appellant applied before the RTO for obtaining duplicate certified copy of the certificate of registration of the Truck in question.
However, RTO denied issuing duplicate certified copy of the certificate of registration on the ground that due to the report of the theft of the Truck, the details regarding registration certificate on the computer has been locked.
Therefore, the RTO refused to issue the duplicate certified copy of the certificate of registration of the Truck. Thereafter, the appellant – original complainant applied before the insurance company along with photocopy of the certificate of registration and registration particulars, as provided by the RTO.
Despite the above, the claim was not settled and therefore, the appellant filed a fresh consumer complaint before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission. That the said District Commission vide order dated 23.01.2015 dismissed the said complaint by observing that as the appellant had not filed the relevant documents for settlement of claim therefore, the non-settlement of the claim cannot be said to be deficiency in service.
The order passed by the District Commission has been confirmed by the State Commission and thereafter, by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission by the impugned judgment and order.
Apex Court held that the insurance company has become too technical while settling the claim and has acted arbitrarily. The appellant has been asked to furnish documents which were beyond the control of the appellant to procure and furnish. While settling the claims, the insurance company should not be too technical and ask for the documents, which the insured is not in a position to produce. Appellant is entitled to the insurance amount of Rs. 12 lakhs along with interest @ 7 per cent from the date of submitting the claim. Appeal Allowed.
Gurmel Singh
Versus
Branch Manager, National Insurance Co. Ltd.
