IMPORTANT POINT
National Commission should not go beyond grounds of repudiation of insurance claim while hearing appeal against order passed by State Commission.

JUDGMENT :

Aniruddha Bose, J.

Leave granted.

2. The repudiation of a claim in respect of a “Marine Cargo-Open Policy” gives rise to this appeal and the appellants are the claimants before us. The policy, initially covered a sum of rupees two hundred crores. Under the heading “Risk Details”, against Sl.No.1 of the policy document, next to the column “Voyage”, it was indicated “from anywhere in India to anywhere in India”. Period of Insurance was from 29th October 2009 to Midnight on 28th October 2010. There was subsequent addition of terms and raising of insurance coverage as well. Fresh endorsement schedules were issued incorporating the changes. These endorsement schedules, however, carried the expression “Attached to and forming part of policy No.12012/21/2010/876” (that being the original policy number). The endorsement schedule dated 25th November 2009 described the policy as “On the Sales Turnover basis”. This endorsement became effective from 14:50 hrs on 25th November 2009. The next endorsement was made on 8th April 2010, also attached to the original policy, by which sum insured was raised by a further rupees two hundred crores.

3. The appellants are traders and manufacturers of aluminium products. They claim to have purchased, by high seas sale agreement dated 22nd June 2010, eight containers of aluminium ingots. These containers had arrived at Jawaharlal Nehru Port Trust (JNPT) and from there, they were sent to the appellants’ factory unit at Silvassa by a transporter by road. The appellants’ case is that out of the eight containers, one was stolen and the incident of theft took place on 2nd July 2010. According to the appellants, value of stolen goods was rupees thirty-four lakhs ninety two thousand and eighty one. Their claim was lodged with the respondent on 18th March 2011 but this was repudiated by the latter. The appellants then approached the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (Maharashtra) against the insurance company. We shall henceforth refer to the said forum as the State Commission.

4. The appellants’ initial Complaint Case no. CC/12/177 was rejected by the State Commission, by an order passed on 27th July 2012 and the appeal against that dismissal order registered as Appeal No. 700 of 2012, was also dismissed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (“National Commission”) by an order pronounced on 15th January 2018. This decision is under appeal before us.

5. As we have already narrated, the policy underwent some changes. Clause 3 of the endorsement schedule dated 25th November 2009 specified:-

“3. The supplies made from the following two works locations are held covered under the locations mentioned below.

(a) JSK Industries Private Limited,

Survey No. 369/1/1/2,

Behind Siyaram Silk Mills,

Village Sayil,

Slivassa-396230,

UT of Dadra and Nagar Haveli.

(b) JSK Industries Private Limited,

126/1-8 Rakholi High School Road, Rakholi Village,

Slivassa-396240

UT of Dadra and Nagar haveli.

Other terms and conditions of the policy remain unaltered.

(quoted verbatim from the paperbook)

6. After the appellants lodged the claim, the insurance company by a communication dated 7th September 2011, raised certain queries. These included:-

“1. The above stock turn over policy was issued on 29.10.2009 for a sum insured of Rs. 200 crores. As per the documents and statements submitted the above sum insured has exhausted as on 22.12.2009 & no balance was available to cover further declarations.

2. Endorsement for increase in sum insured was passed on 08.04.2010 for Rs. 200 crores which was fully utilized to cover declarations for the period 08.04.2010 till May 2018 as per the documents and statements submitted.

3. The