BMW owner wins 14-year battle: Insurer told to pay ₹70 lakh after car gutted in fire

A consumer commission has directed United India Insurance Company to pay ₹70 lakh to a BMW owner whose car was gutted in a fire after a tyre puncture left him stranded on a Maharashtra highway. 

A consumer commission has directed United India Insurance Company to pay more than ₹70 lakh to a BMW owner whose car was completely gutted in a fire after a tyre puncture left him stranded on a highway in Maharashtra. The insurer had rejected his claim, arguing that leaving the vehicle unattended overnight violated the policyholder’s obligation to take reasonable precautions to prevent further loss.

The ruling brings an end to a 14-year-long legal battle fought by Ravikant S Patil, who had parked his damaged vehicle near a roadside eatery before arranging alternative transport to return home.

The commission rejected the insurer’s contention, holding that the insurance policy did not impose an absolute prohibition on leaving a broken-down vehicle unattended. It also observed that a person’s safety could not be compromised merely to protect a vehicle.

BMW found burnt the next morning

The incident took place on March 8, 2012, when Patil was driving his BMW on a state highway near Dhulkhed in Maharashtra. After a tyre puncture left him stranded late at night, with no mechanic available nearby, he parked the car beside a roadside dhaba.

Patil locked the vehicle and secured its windows before returning home in another vehicle, intending to retrieve the BMW the following morning.

However, when he returned to the location the next day, he found that the car had been reduced to a burnt-out shell.

He subsequently approached United India Insurance Company to claim compensation for the loss. The insurer refused to settle the claim, maintaining that leaving the vehicle unattended overnight breached the policy condition requiring the owner to take reasonable steps to minimise further damage.

Commission finds owner took reasonable precautions

The consumer commission rejected the insurer’s argument, noting that the policy did not categorically bar a policyholder from leaving a vehicle unattended when it had broken down.