Insurance Co cannot deny theft claim in absence of FIR: Panel
Insurance Companies cannot deny theft claim to a consumer on the ground that no FIR was registered in connection with the incident.
By PTI |
NEW DELHI: Insurance Companies cannot deny theft claim to a consumer on the ground that no FIR was registered in connection with the incident, the Delhi Consumer Commission has said.
"It is a misconceived notion that the insurance policy covering the risk of theft is not indemnifiable unless and until a person produces the copy of FIR," Commission President Justice J D Kapoor said.
The Commission also called for removing "misconception" from the minds of the public regarding the necessity of registration of the FIR to claim reimbursements in theft cases.
Rapping insurance firms for insisting on the FIR, the Commission comprising Rumnita Mittal as member, said, "There is no difference between FIR and a simple complaint made by a person with the police detailing the facts of occurrence."
The Commission's observations came while dismissing an appeal of United India Insurance Company Ltd against a district forum's order directing it to pay Rs 30,000 as compensation to Delhi resident Subhash Chander Khanna.
Khanna, whose wallet was stolen in a cinema hall at Jaipur in 2006, was denied reimbursement as the insurance company suspected that the theft was not committed and asked him to furnish the FIR to substantiate his claim.
The complainant instead produced a stamped certificate from Jaipur police stating that the FIR, although registered, was not traceable, but the insurance company rejected it.
Finding no merit in the appeal of insurance firm, the state Commission said, "In view of the attitude of the company in not settling a simple dispute for more than two to three years forcing the insured to approach a consumer forum, the amount of compensation awarded is reasonable and does not call for interference."
"It is a misconceived notion that the insurance policy covering the risk of theft is not indemnifiable unless and until a person produces the copy of FIR," Commission President Justice J D Kapoor said.
The Commission also called for removing "misconception" from the minds of the public regarding the necessity of registration of the FIR to claim reimbursements in theft cases.
Rapping insurance firms for insisting on the FIR, the Commission comprising Rumnita Mittal as member, said, "There is no difference between FIR and a simple complaint made by a person with the police detailing the facts of occurrence."
The Commission's observations came while dismissing an appeal of United India Insurance Company Ltd against a district forum's order directing it to pay Rs 30,000 as compensation to Delhi resident Subhash Chander Khanna.
Khanna, whose wallet was stolen in a cinema hall at Jaipur in 2006, was denied reimbursement as the insurance company suspected that the theft was not committed and asked him to furnish the FIR to substantiate his claim.
The complainant instead produced a stamped certificate from Jaipur police stating that the FIR, although registered, was not traceable, but the insurance company rejected it.
Finding no merit in the appeal of insurance firm, the state Commission said, "In view of the attitude of the company in not settling a simple dispute for more than two to three years forcing the insured to approach a consumer forum, the amount of compensation awarded is reasonable and does not call for interference."
Download
The Economic Times Business News App for the Latest News in Business, Sensex, Stock Market Updates & More.
The Economic Times Business News App for the Latest News in Business, Sensex, Stock Market Updates & More.
Download
The Economic Times News App for Quarterly Results, Latest News in ITR, Business, Share Market, Live Sensex News & More.
The Economic Times News App for Quarterly Results, Latest News in ITR, Business, Share Market, Live Sensex News & More.
ADVERTISEMENT
