Back
2010(2) CPR 36 (NC)
NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, NEW DELHI
K.S. Gupta, Presiding Member and Mrs. Rajyalakshmi Rao, Member
M/s. Jagdamba Foods Ltd. —Complainant
versus
The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. & Anr. —Opp. Parties
Original Petition No. 112 of 1999
Decided on 14.7.2009
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Complainant:Mr. Amit Gupta, Advocate.
For the Opp. Party:Mr. P.K. Seth, Advocate.
IMPORTANT POINT
Where complainant failed to submit requisite documents to meet the doubts of raised by the surveyor and concurred silently throughout deduction made from claimed amount cannot be termed by him as arbitrary.
Headnote:Consumer Protection Act, 1986—Section 2(1)(g)—Deficiency in service—Insurance claim—Basmati rice belonging to appellant lying in godown of his clearing and forwarding agent at Kandla Port—Suffered heavy damage due to cyclone—Claim bill for Rs. 458,52,391/- filed by complainant—Deduction of Rs. 138,97,621/- made for the bill by the insurer—Opposite parties discharged their duties by settling the claim in short time—Doubts raised by the Surveyor not met by the complainant by submitting necessary documents —Deduction made by the opposite party cannot be termed arbitrary because complainant concurred silently throughout —Variation of price of sela rice and actual loss by taking cost price into consideration by surveyor a normal procedural work—Deficiency in service not proved—Complaint dismissed. (Paras 16 to 21)
Mrs. Rajyalakshmi Rao, Member—The present complaint is filed by M/s. Jagdamba Foods Ltd. through their Director, Mr. Ashok Gupta, against the opposite party—New India Assurance Co. Ltd. for deficiency in service in arbitrarily reducing the claim amount.
2. The complainant is engaged in the business of purchase, processing, selling and export of rice of all qualities. It is a Government recognised trading house and has its ultra modern plant at Taraori, District Karnal, Haryana. Complainant received a purchase order from Saleh Abdulaziz Babaker Sons Co., Saudi Arabia for purchase of 3,000 Mt. Tons vide Purchase Order dated 1-3-1998 (Annexure C-V). A contract was entered between the complainant and the Importer (Annexure C-VI) at the rate of US$ 845/- to 870/- C and F Damam per Mt. Ton. As per the Export Promotion Policy of the Govt. of India, the exporter is also entitled to get Duty Draw Back and other benefits. The working of the rate per ton was Rs.38,327/- for 75 kg.-bags.
3. To meet this export order and other export commitments, the complainant purchased, processed, packed and transported the Basmati Sela rice from its factory to Kandla Port, which was packed in 30,649 bags weighing 2537.465 Mt. tons. The complainant purchased three insurance policies from the opposite party for covering the fire, flood, storm and tempest risks. The details of the policies are given here as under:-
Sl. No.Policy No.Dated Valid uptoValue Insured
1.11/57/3312-11-9711-11-983 Crores
2.11/593930-12-9729-12-982 Crores
3.11/6119010-02-9809-02-994 Crores
Total Value Insured9 Crores
4 . A severe cyclone hit the Kandla Port on 9-6-1998 causing heavy damage to the Port and the Godowns nearby. The rice stock of the complainant was lying in Godown No.NG-12 and NG-3, which was allotted by Kandla Port Trust to M/s. V. Arjoon, the clearing and forwarding agent of the complainant at Kandla Port. The stock certificate issued by M/s. V. Arjoon and another confirmation regarding the allotment of the Godown are placed as annexure C-VIII and C-IX respectively. The complainant stated that his export cargo, which was lying in the Godown, suffered heavy damages due to the cyclone and the rice stock was extensively damaged. He sent an intimation regarding the loss to the opposite party on 10-6-98. The Godown owner also requested them vide letter dated 11-6-98 for the appointment of the Surveyor.
5. Preliminary survey was conducted by M/s. G.P. Dave and Sons. Thereafter the complainant got the quality test done of the Sela Basmati rice and it is reported that out of 30,649 bags of rice. 21,597 bags are neither fit for human consumption nor for animal feed. 5,860 bags were certified as not fit for human consumption but fit for Cattle Feed. The balance 3,192 bags were certified as containing 50% of the rejected material, but fit for human consumption after reprocessing. The complainant submitted the claim bill for Rs.4,58,52,391/- along with the relevant supporting documents placed as annexure-C-X. Opposite party sanctioned on account payment of Rs.1,65,95,021/- on 5-8-1998 and demanded some documents to finalise the claim which were supplied on 24-8-1998. M/s. Rakesh Jain and Associates, Surveyors raised some queries vide letter dated 31-8-1998 to which the complainant replied on 2-9-1998. Thereafter opposite party paid a sum of Rs.1,50,09,979/-.
6. The complainant had no option but to sign the receipt on compulsion because he was facing great hardship. It is also averred that the opposite party has threatened that it will reject the entire claim otherwise. After receiving the amount, the complainant immediately lodged a protest with the opposite party on 6-11-1998 through registered AD letter against the illegal deductions of Rs.1,38,97,621/- made from the total claim amount of Rs.4,58,52,391/-, for which no details were provided. The complainant had asked for the details and the basis for deducting Rs. 1,38,97,62/- but the said information was not provided to him.
