Embedded Files
Delay in informing the occurrence of the theft of the vehicle to the insurance company, though the FIR was registered immediately, would not disentitle the claimant of the insurance claim
Delay in informing the occurrence of the theft of the vehicle to the insurance company, though the FIR was registered immediately, would not disentitle the claimant of the insurance claim
Insurance – Claim – Delay - Delay in informing the occurrence of the theft of the vehicle to the insurance company, though the FIR was registered immediately, would not disentitle the claimant of the insurance claim - Hold that when an insured has lodged the FIR immediately after the theft of a vehicle occurred and when the police after investigation have lodged a final report after the vehicle was not traced 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 - Concur with Om Prakash v. Reliance General Insurance & Anr. (Civil Appeal No. 15611/ 2017 decided on 04.10.2017) that in such a situation if the claimant is denied the claim merely on the ground that there is some delay in intimating the insurance company about the occurrence of the theft, it would be taking a hyper technical view. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Parvesh Chander Chadha, (Civil Appeal No.6739/ 2010 decided on 17.08.2010; 2009 (1) CLT 552, not good law. #2020 SCeJ 69
Held, further to be noted that, in the event, after the registration of an FIR, the police successfully recovering the vehicle and returning the same to the insured, there would be no occasion to lodge a claim for compensation on account of the policy. It is only when the police are not in a position to trace and recover the vehicle and the final report is lodged by the police after the vehicle is not traced, the insured would be in a position to lodge his claim for compensation. As observed by the bench of two learned Judges in the case of Om Prakash (supra), after the vehicle is stolen, a person, who lost his vehicle, would immediately lodge an FIR and the immediate conduct that would be expected of such a person would be to assist the police in search of the vehicle. The registration of the FIR regarding the theft of the vehicle and the final report of the police after the vehicle is not traced would substantiate the claim of the claimant that the vehicle is stolen. Not only that, but the surveyors appointed by the insurance company are also required to enquire whether the claim of the claimant regarding the theft is genuine or not. If the surveyor appointed by the insurance company, upon inquiry, finds that the claim of theft is genuine then coupled with the immediate registration of the FIR, in our view, would be conclusive proof of the vehicle being stolen.
Report abuse