NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD vs Deepika Verma

FEELING aggrieved of the impugned order dated 17.5.2005 passed by the District Forum, the appellant Insurance Company has been directed to pay Rs. 8,700 towards the cost of mobile set, insured with appellant Company which was allegedly kept in her purse and the purse was taken away by some miscreants when she was in the market and Rs. 2,000 as compensation and Rs. 500 as cost of litigation, the appellant has directed this appeal.

ADMITTEDLY the respondent purchased a GSM mobile model No. Nokia 6610 for Rs. 8,700 from respondent No. 2 and got it insured with the appellant under the Special Policy No. 351700/46039500324 named as HCL Safeguard Nokia GSM mobile handset insurance cover. According to the respondent she was coming from the college when somebody snatched her purse and ran away. She immediately reported the matter to the P.S. Roop Nagar, District North Delhi and registered her insurance claim with the appellant along with original bill of purchase of the mobile. The claim of the respondent was repudiated by the appellant on the ground that the respondent had changed her statement time and again inasmuch as at first instance she stated that the mobile was taken by somebody while she was buying some articles from the shop and secondly she stated that somebody snatched the purse which contained the mobile when she was going in the market which was busy market. These two varying statements persuaded the appellant to reject the claim of the respondent by disbelieving her version that the mobile was ever stolen or taken away.

IN terms of the insurance policy it was the version of the respondent before the police which was to be acted upon and relied upon and before police she has categorically stated that the purse which contained the mobile was taken away by somebody when she was purchasing some articles from the shop.

WE are sorry to comment adversely upon the conduct of the appellant qua their customers. The only fact which was to be ascertained was whether the mobile was stolen or taken away by some persons or not. No consumer would report the matter to the police for nothing as it involves the risk of being penalised in case of false report. Production of the copy of the report by the respondent should have been sufficient for the appellant to accept the claim of the respondent. In the result, we do not find any merit in the appeal and dismiss the same.

APPEAL is disposed of in above term. Bank Guarantee/FDR, if any, furnished by the appellant be returned forthwith.

A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and also to the concerned District Forum and thereafter the file be consigned to record room. Appeal dismissed.