1. 1
BEFORE THE HON’BLE CONSUMER FORUM, I.S.B.T.
KASHMIRI GATE
COMPLAINT NO.23/13
IN THE MATTER OF:
KAPIL GOYAL …….COMPLAINANT
VERSUS
SHRIRAM GENERAL
INSURANCE CO.LTD. …...RESPONDENT
WRITTEN STATEMENT ON BEHALF OF THE
RESPONDENT, SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE
COMPANY LTD.
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:
PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS:
1. That it is the submissions of this answering Respondent that the
Complainant did not come before this Hon’ble Forum with clean
hands and did not disclose the material facts before this Hon’ble
Forum.
2. That it is submitted that this answering Respondent had issued a
GCCV- Public Carriers Other than Three Wheelers Package Policy
to the Complainant vide policy no. 10003/31/11/367601 for the
vehicle bearing registration no. RJ 31 GA 1583 for the period from

2. 2
30.11.2010 to 29.11.2011 and the liability of this answering
Respondent to indemnify the Complainant is as per the terms and
conditions of the Insurance Policy. The insurance policy along with
its terms and conditions is hereby annexed as ANNEXURE 1.
3. It is the submissions of the answering Respondent Insurance
Company that this Hon’ble Court has no jurisdiction to entertain
the present matter as the accident took place in Rajasthan, the
Complainant resident of Rajasthan. Furthermore the policy in
question was issued in Rajasthan. It is submitted in this regard that
as per the judgment passed by Apex Court in “Sonic Surgical v
National Insurance Co. Ltd” the branch office for the purpose of
jurisdiction shall be treated to the office where the cause of action
has arisen.
4. It is submitted in this regard that the answering Respondent
Insurance Company never repudiated the Claim of the Complainant
thereby causing any deficiency in services. It is further submitted
that the Complainant has not attached any document evidencing
that answering Respondent Insurance Company has repudiated the
Claim of the Complainant. Hence the present complaint is liable to
be dismissed as the same is premature and no cause of action has
ever arisen against the answering Respondent Insurance Company.

3. 3
5. It is further submitted in this regard that the terms and conditions of
the Insurance Policy stated that:
“Notice shall be given in writing to the Company
immediately upon the occurrence of any accidental
loss or damagein the event of anyclaim and thereafter
the insured shall give all such information and
assistance as the Company shall require. Every letter
claim writ summons and/or process or copy thereof
shall be forwarded to the Company immediately on
receipt by the Insured. Notice shall also be given in
writing to the Company immediately the Insured shall
have knowledgeof anyimpending prosecution, inquest
or fatal inquiry in respect of any occurrence which
may give rise to a claim under this policy…….”
It is therefore, evident that because of the delayed/no intimation on
the part of the Complainant, there was a breach of the terms and
conditions of the insurance policy.
5. It is submitted in this regard that the present Complaint is liable to
be dismissed as the Complainant is not cooperating with the
answering Respondent insurance Company in processing of the
Claim which is in clear breach of the terms and conditions of the
Policy.

4. 4
6. It is the submissions of the answering Respondent Insurance
Company that the Complainant has not provided all the relevant
documents to the answering Respondent Insurance Company which
are required to process the Claim of the Complainant.
PARAWISE REPLY:
Without prejudice to the foregoing Preliminary Objections, the
Answering Respondent submits the reply to the Complaint as
under:-
1. That the contents of the Para No. 1 of the present Complaint is
denied for the want of knowledge.
2. That the contents of Para No. 2 of the present Complaint are a
matter of record and hence needs no reply.
3. That the contents of Para No. 3 are admitted to the extent that this
answering Respondent had issued a GCCV- Public Carriers Other
then Three Wheelers Package Policy to the Complainant vide
policy no. 10003/31/11/367601 for the vehicle bearing registration
no. RJ 31 GA 1583 for the period from 30.11.2010 to 29.11.2011
and the liability of this answering Respondent to indemnify the

5. 5
Complainant is as per the terms and conditions of the Insurance
Policy.
4. That the contents of Para No. 4 of the present Complaint are denied
save and except that the answering Respondent Insurance Company
issued the insurance policy which was subject to the terms and
condition of the Policy contract.
5. That the contents of Para no. 5 of the present Complaint are denied
for the want of knowledge.
6. That the contents of Para No. 6 of present Complaint are wrong and
denied. It is specifically denied that the Complainant after
informing the Opposite Party has got repaired his truck from a
workshop and the workshop raised a bill of Rs. 4,53,869/- for repair
and replacement of damaged parts. It is submitted in this regard that
the Complainant has not annexed any document evidencing that the
Complainant timely and without delay informed the answering
Respondent Insurance Company about the occurrence of the
alleged accident. Furthermore the Complainant has not informed
this Hon’ble Court regarding the mode and manner of the
occurrence of the said alleged accident.
7. That the contents of Para No. 7 of present Complaint are wrong and
denied. It is specifically denied that the Complainant filed all the

6. 6
supporting bills and documents with the answering Respondent
Insurance Company.
8. That the contents of Para Nos. 8 of the present Complaint are
wrong and hence denied. It is specifically denied the Opposite Party
had given an assurance to the Complainant at the time of filing the
Claim that Claim will be settled within two months.
9. That the contents of Para No. 9 of present Complaint are wrong and
denied. It is specifically denied the Complainant visited the office
of the opposite party at Delhi and Jaipur but has not received any
Claim from the Opposite party till date. It is further specifically
denied that the Complainant has issued any Legal Notice to the
answering Respondent Insurance Company.
10. That the contents of Para No. 10 of the present Complaint are
wrong and denied.
11. That the contents of Para No. 11 of the present Complaint wrong
and hence denied in totality. It is specifically denied that the
Complainant faces a lot of harassment and mental agony due to the
conduct of the Opposite Party.
12-17.That the contents of Para No. 12-17 are wrong and vehemently
denied in totality.

7. 7
18. That the contents of Para No. 18 of the present Complaint are
wrong and denied. It is specifically denied that this Hon’ble Court
has the jurisdiction to entertain and decide the present Complaint.
19. That the contents of Para No. 19 of the present Complaint are
denied. It is submitted in this regard that no cause of action ever
arose in favour of the Complainant and against the answering
Respondent Insurance Company.
20. That the contents of Para No. 20 of the present Complaint are
denied for the want of knowledge.
REPLY TO THE PRAYER CLAUSE
That in responseto the contents of the Prayers clause, it is the submissions
of the answering Respondent Insurance Company that the prayer as
prayed is untenable and that this Respondent is not liable to pay any
compensation to the Complainant.
a. It is specifically denied that this Respondent be directed to pay Rs.
4,53,869/-;
b. It is specifically denied that interest @ 18% p.a, be granted to the
Complainant from the date of theft;
c. It is specifically denied that an amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- be granted
towards mental agony and distress owing solely to the unfair
practice and deficiency of services of the Opposite Party;

8. 8
d. It is specifically denied that an amount of Rs.35,000/- be granted as
cost of litigation;
e. It is specifically denied that any other relief as prayed by the
Complainant.
In view of the forgoing facts and circumstances, it is most respectfully
prayed that the Complaint as against the answering Respondent Insurance
Company may kindly be dismissed with heavy costs.
RESPONDENT
THROUGH
KHAITAN SUD AND PARTNERS
ADVOCATES FOR RESPONDENT
D-41, DEFENCECOLONY
NEW DELHI – 110024
NEW DELHI
DATED:

9. 9
BEFORE THE HON’BLE CONSUMER FORUM, I.S.B.T.
KASHMIRI GATE
COMPLAINT NO.23/13
IN THE MATTER OF:
KAPIL GOYAL …….COMPLAINANT
VERSUS
SHRIRAM GENERAL
INSURANCE CO.LTD. …...RESPONDENT
I, Rohit Sharma, S/o Suraj Prakash Sharma, aged about 26 years,
working as Officer Legal, Shriram General Insurance Comp. Ltd., E
402-403, GD ITL Towers, Netaji Subhash Place, Pitampura, New
Delhi, 110034, do hereby solemnly affirm and state as under:
1. That I am employed with the Respondent Company and am well
conversant with the facts of the aforesaid case. I am competent and
authorized to file the present reply on behalf of the Respondent,
Company and hence am competent to swear this Affidavit.
2. That I have read and understood the contents of the present Written
Statement and affirm the contents to be true and correct based on
the official records maintained by the Respondent.

10. 10
3. That no part of this affidavit is false and no material facts have been
concealed there from.
DEPONENT
V E R I F I C A T I O N:
I, the above named Deponent, do hereby verify that the contents of the
present Affidavit are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and
belief, and no part of it is false and no material facts have been concealed
there from. Verified at New Delhi, on this _____ day of _______, 2013.
DEPONENT