SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, Hemant Gupta, JJ.
M/s New India Assurance Co. Ltd. – Appellant
Vs.
M/s Luxra Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. – Respondents
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 9668 OF 2014
WITH
M/s Luxra Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. & Anr – Appellants
Vs.
M/s New India Assurance Co. Ltd. – Respondent
CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 4371-4372 OF 2015
Decided on : 01-05-2019
(2009) 8 SCC 507 - Relied upon
Facts of the case:
The complainant had taken a fire insurance from the respondent.
A fire broke out in the factory of the complainant for which raised a claim for Rs. 54,93,865/-. The Insurance Co. repudiated the claim.
Ultimately, the NCDRC allowed appeal of the complainant and awarded a compensation of Rs. 54,93,865/-
Finding if the Court:
There is no illegality in the impugned order.
Result: Appeal allowed.
JUDGMENT
Hemant Gupta, J.
This order shall dispose of Civil Appeals filed under Section 23 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1985 [1985 Act] preferred by both the parties against an order passed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission [Commission] against its order dated 01.08.2014 wherein, a sum of Rs. 54,93,865/- has been awarded as compensation for loss suffered on account of damage by fire to the Complainant, subject to the condition that the said amount will be paid within 45 days by the Insurance Company otherwise it will carry interest at the rate of 10 % per annum till its realisation.
2. For the facility of reference, the respondent in Civil Appeal No. 9668 of 2014 will be called hereinafter as the Complainant, whereas the Appellant- New India Assurance Co. Ltd. will be called as Insurance Company. Civil Appeal Nos. 4371-72 of 2015 are filed by the Complainant.
3. The Complainant is an Industrial Unit engaged in manufacture of garments. The Complainant obtained a policy of insurance for the risk of fire for the period 27.3.2000 to 26.3.2001 with the assured sum of Rs. 85,00,000/-. It was on 12.07.2000 at about 3.45 AM, the factory of the Complainant was engulfed in fire. It is thereafter, the Complainant lodged a claim for loss due to fire incident in its factory.
4. M/s R.N. Sharma & Co., was appointed as an investigator to conduct a preliminary investigation by the Insurance Company. The preliminary investigation report was submitted on 20.07.2000. It is thereafter, M/s Sunil J. Vora & Associates was appointed as the Surveyor by the Head Office of the Insurance Company on July 28, 2000. The said Surveyor submitted detailed report and accepted the claim of the Complainant for Rs. 54,93,865/-. Out of the said amount, Rs. 1,65,430.53 was the claim on account of damage to building; Rs. 3,93,779.78 was the claim towards the damage to the machinery and Rs. 49,44,657.67 was the claim towards the damage to the stocks. The amount was rounded off to Rs. 54,93,865/-.
5. The Insurance Company issued a communication dated 09.04.2001 to the Complainant asking for certain information after the said report was submitted to the Insurance Company on 12.02.2001. The information sought is as under:-
"1. List of Machineries (copy of assets register)
2. Loss and profit accounts
3. Purchase details of raw materials
4. Verified copy of Balance Sheet for last 2 years.
5. Original copy of LC & LC with extended date of expiry
6. Details of Financial arrangements for increasing the turn over.
7. Clarify the status of insurable interest on building."
6. The Surveyor in his report has given loss to the machinery giving details of the machinery damaged in fire and the amount admissible in respect of its loss. The Insurance Company also communicated a letter to its Senior Branch Manager on 26.09.2001 that the letter of credit dated 11.05.2000 of Singapore Branch of Bank of India was established for Gurcharan Singh & Co. Pvt. Ltd., but the said letter of credit expired without receipt of any document. It was also mentioned that the Complainant is neither a beneficiary nor a notified party of said letter of credit.
7. Subsequently, M/s ABM Engineers & Consultants was appointed as the second Surveyor by the Insurance Company. The said Surveyor accepted the loss of Rs. 24,76,585/- in its report dated 28.02.2002. The second surveyor has taken into consideration stocks statement submitted by the Complainant to Canara Bank on 30.4.2000, 31.05.2000 and 01.07.2000 respectively. Though, the Manager of Canara Bank is said to have pointed out that these statements are like statutory requirements but the surveyor brushed them aside for the reason that these documents cannot be treated as documents for finalising the stock value. It was further observed that if the stocks statement is to be referred to, there is no reason as to why letter of credit could not be materialized. The relevant extracts from the report of the second surveyor are as under: -
"(i) Stock st
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.