KIRTIKUMAR P. GANERIWALA vs National Insurance Company Ltd.

THE complainant is appellant herein and against the order dated 30.12.2003 dismissing his complaint that this appeal has been filed. (For brevity''s sake appellant is referred to as ''Complainant" and respondent/Original O.P. as ''Insurance Company).

AS stated the complainant has filed this appeal. Few relevant facts: The complainant claims to be owner of vehicle of description mentioned in the complaint and in respect of which he had obtained insurance.

According to him the said vehicle was involved in an accident causing damage and, therefore, he lodged claim upon the Insurance Company for the damages sustained to the amount of Rs. 46,941/-.

IT is noticed that the Insurance Company thereafter looked into the matter and as per their practice engaged services of Surveyor. The Insurance Company vide its letter dated 28.1.2002 called upon the complainant to produce documents such as driving licence of the driver, original bills, police report, inspection report, etc.

HOWEVER, the requisitions were not complied with by the complainant. That being so, the Insurance Company did not entertain the claim of the complainant and this has been made the complainant to file this appeal. Even before the District Forum the Insurance Company appeared and reiterated its position stating that the complainant did not adduce any evidence to prove there was any accident. For that matter either police report or Panchanama to prove the fact of accident was to be produced.

THAT being so, District Forum proceeded to reject the complaint.

AS much as in paragraph 5 is concerned, this is what the District Forum has observed- On perusal of material on record, the main question arises for our consideration is, whether really accident of the vehicle has taken place or not? Complainant shrewdly not mentioned the date of accident in his complaint. Even we could not find out the exact date of accident in his complaint. Even we could not find out the exact date from other documents on record. It is pertinent to note that neither copy of F.I.R. or Panchanama of the vehicle is produced by the complainant. In the letter of opposite party dated 28.1.2002 (Exhibit C) it has specifically asked the complainant to produce the driving licence, original bills, police report, re-inspection report in respect of the vehicle. Not only this, in Exhibit A there is question in respect of the vehicle. Not only this, in Exhibit-A there is question mark before police report. It means, it is not clear when and how accident of the vehicle has taken place. Unless fact of accident is proved by the complainant under the policy he will not get any right to get the reimbursement. AS stated above complainant has failed to prove the fact of accident. Hence, we cannot indorse the claim of the complainant. We are in entire agreement with the findings as rendered by the District Forum reproduced hereinabove in the fact situation as obtained in the matter herein. No merits ORDER 1. Appeal stands dismissed. 2. No order as to costs. 3. Office to furnish copies of the order to the parties.

Appeal dismissed.