SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(SC) 259

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
B.R. GAVAI, SANDEEP MEHTA, JJ.
M/s. Kozyflex Mattresses Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
SBI General Insurance Company Limited And Anr. – Respondents
Civil Appeal No(s). 7966 of 2022
Decided On : 20-03-2024

Advocates appeared:
For the Appellant(s) : Mr. Krishna Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr. Sravan Kumar Karanam, AOR Ms. Tayade Pranali Gowardhan, Adv. Ms. Mamatha Ralla, Adv. Mr. Rudroji Rakesh Kumar, Adv. Mr. Shaik Sohil Akthar, Adv.
For the Respondent(s): Mr. D. Vardhrajan, Adv. Mr. Rajat Khattry, Adv. Mr. Shagun Ruhil, Adv. Mr. Abhay Kumar, AOR

IMPORTANT POINT
Consumer Protection Act being a beneficial legislation, a liberal interpretation has to be given to statute.

Headnote:

Consumer Protection Act, 2019 – Section 67 – Insurance – Standard Fire and Special Perils Policy (Material Damage) – Fire in insured premises – Claim repudiated on the ground that same was fraudulent and exaggerated – Definition of ‘person’ as provided in Act of 1986 is inclusive and not exhaustive – Consumer Protection Act being a beneficial legislation, a liberal interpretation has to be given to statute – Very fact that in Act of 2019, a body corporate has been brought within definition of ‘person’, by itself indicates that legislature realized incongruity in unamended provision and has rectified the anomaly by including word ‘company’ in definition of ‘person’ – Only a formal denial was offered by insurer-respondent – Ends of justice require that insured-appellant should have been provided proper opportunity to file its rebuttal/objections to affidavit/reports submitted by insurer-respondent before National Commission and consequently, complaint should be reconsidered on merits after providing such opportunity to appellant – Impugned order set aside and matter remitted to National Commission for considering and deciding complaint afresh. (Paras 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 and 20)

Facts of the case:

Present appeal under Section 67 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 has been preferred by appellant herein for assailing final order dated 24th August, 2022 rendered by National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, rejecting Consumer Case praying for a direction to SBI General Insurance Company to indemnify it for loss caused by fire in insured premises.

Findings of Court:

Appellant shall be permitted to file its rebuttal/rejoinder affidavit before National Commission limited to contents of reports. Thereafter, matter shall be reheard and decided on merits afresh.

Result : Appeal disposed of.

JUDGMENT :

(Sandeep Mehta, J.)

1. This appeal under Section 67 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (hereinafter being referred to as ‘Act of 2019’) has been preferred by the appellant herein for assailing final order dated 24th August, 2022 rendered by National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (hereinafter being referred to as ‘National Commission’), rejecting the Consumer Case No. 754 of 2015 filed by M/s. Kozyflex Mattresses Private Limited(hereinafter being referred to as the ‘insured-appellant’) praying for a direction to the SBI General Insurance Company(hereinafter being referred to as the ‘insurer-respondent’) to indemnify it for the loss caused by fire in the insured premises being the manufacturing unit of the insured-appellant company situated at Sy. No.-41-25, village Poosapatirega, Mandal and District Vizianagaram.

2. Brief facts essential for adjudication of the present civil appeal are noted hereinbelow.

3. The insured-appellant herein being a Private Limited Company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 is engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of coir foam mattresses, pillows, cushions and other coir by-products. The manufacturing unit of the insured-appellant is situated at Sy. No.-41-25, village Poosapatirega, Mandal and District Vizianagaram and was registered as a small scale industry with the District Industries Centre, Vizianagaram. The insured-appellant obtained a ‘Standard Fire and Special Perils Policy(Material Damage)’ No.0000000000807725 (in short ‘Policy’) for the period commencing from 28th March, 2013 to 27th March, 2014 for a sum of Rs. 1.25 crores on the plant and machinery and a sum of Rs.30,00,000/- on stock from the insurer-respondent. By an endorsement dated 29th March, 2013, the sum insured for stock was further enhanced to Rs.1.55 crores and for building the sum insured was enhanced to Rs.20,00,000/-.

4. It is claimed that a massive fire incident took place in the manufacturing unit of the insured-appellant in the intervening night of 13th/14th April, 2013. Immediate action by way of informing the police and the fire service station was taken and fire tenders were sent to the spot. The insured-appellant informed the insurer-respondent about the fire accident and the losses suffered in the manufacturing unit in the fire incident on 15th April, 2013. The insurer-respondent appointed Professional Surveyor & Loss Adjustor Pvt. Ltd., Secunderabad as the surveyor on 15th April, 2013. The surveyor inspected the factory premises on 16th April, 2013 and 17th April, 2013 and took photographs, videography and prepared inventory. The surveyor asked the insured-appellant to remove the collapsed roof from the manufacturing unit premises in order to conduct inspection of the machinery and stock and for carrying out the measurement and quantification. The collapsed roof was not found removed till the subsequent inspection conducted by the surveyor on 15th and 16th May, 2013. The third inspection was conducted between 15th and 17th July, 2014 and it is stated that by that time, the machineries in the manufacturing unit had been repaired. The insured-appellant submitted an insurance claim for a sum of Rs. 3.31 crores i.e. Rs.40,11,152/- for building, Rs.1,08,47,435/- for plant and machinery and Rs.1,87,72,489/- for stock.

5. The insurer-respondent appointed Mr. Kalahasti Satyanarayana, Dy.S.P. (Retd.), Insurance Claim Investigator, Guntur and Mr. K. Jagannadha Sastry, Advocate, Independent Investigator and Fact Finder, Vizianagaram to verify the documents submitted by the insured-appellant in support of his claim and to submit their independent reports. Mr. Kalahasti Satyanarayana submitted his inspection report dated 12th October, 2013 and Mr. K. Jagannadha Sastry submitted his inspection report dated 25th January, 2014 noting inter-alia that the purchase of machinery from M/s. Maheshwari Ribbons, Gudivada to the tune of Rs. 1,39,64,475/- and stock from Jageswari Enterprises to the tune of

    Click Here to Read the rest of this document
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10
    11
    SupremeToday Portrait Ad
    supreme today icon
    logo-black

    An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

    Please visit our Training & Support
    Center or Contact Us for assistance

    qr

    Scan Me!

    India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

    For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

    whatsapp-icon Back to top