After a long battle of 22 years, Ghaziabad's Puneet Agarwal won the insurance claim of his stolen car. He bought a new Alto worth Rs 1.9 lakh in 2003, which was insured with National Insurance on the same day. But just a month later, his car was stolen in Haridwar. After this, the legal battle started, which ended in 2025 and finally he got compensation of Rs 1.4 lakh. Let us know how the person won the case against the insurance company and what was the decision of the commission.
Why did the insurance company reject the claim?
Puneet Agarwal had submitted all the necessary documents to the insurance company by 2004. But the insurance company rejected his claim saying that he had not parked the car safely and did not take adequate precautions. He also wrote letters to the insurance company several times, but he did not get any reply. Disappointed with the insurance company, Agarwal filed a complaint with the ghaziabad District Consumer Commission (DCDRC). But the commission first rejected the petition saying that it did not have the jurisdiction to decide on the matter. He then appealed to the State Consumer Commission (SCDRC), lucknow in 2011. In 2025, the state commission held that the ghaziabad DCDRC should hear the case. After this, in July 2025, the DCDRC finally ruled in favor of Agarwal.
What was said in the verdict?
The ghaziabad Consumer Commission ordered that the insurance company pay Agarwal 1.43 lakhs, which is 75% of the insured vehicle value (IDV) of 1.9 lakhs. Also, 5,000 extra should be given for mental agony and litigation expenses. If this amount is not paid within 45 days, then the insurance company will have to pay 6% annual interest on it.
The ghaziabad Consumer Commission ordered that the insurance company pay Agarwal 1.43 lakhs, which is 75% of the insured vehicle value (IDV) of 1.9 lakhs. Also, 5,000 extra should be given for mental agony and litigation expenses. If this amount is not paid within 45 days, then the insurance company will have to pay 6% annual interest on it.
Question on the policy of rejecting claims in case of theft
Insurance expert Rakesh Kumar says that in cases of theft in motor insurance, disputes often arise over the interpretation of 'adequate security'. Insurance companies often reject claims on the basis of general negligence, but the supreme court has clearly stated in one of its old decisions that in case of theft, the claim cannot be rejected on the basis of the utility or parking condition of the vehicle. In this case, ghaziabad DCDRC also cited an old case of the supreme court - National Insurance Company vs Nitin Khandelwal (2008), in which the court had said that insurance claim cannot be rejected on vehicle theft, no matter for what purpose the vehicle was used. In such cases, claim settlement should be done on 'non-standard' basis.
