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

2011(1) CPR 9 (NC)
NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
NEW DELHI
K.S. Gupta, Presiding Member and S.K. Naik, Member
M/s. Sahib Exports India —Complainant
versus
New India Assurance Co. Ltd
through its Divisional Manager —Opp Party
Original Petition No. 8 of 2001
Decided on 5.1.2011

Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Complainant:Mr. Pallav Saxena, Advocate.
For the Opp. Partt:Mr. Sanjiv Sharma, Advocate.

IMPORTANT POINT
Insurance Company must honour report of Surveyor.

Headnote:Consumer Protection Act, 1986—Sections 2(1)(g), 2(1)(o) and 21—Insurance—Miscellaneous Accident Insurance Policy—Burglary in business premises—Non-settlement of claim by Insurance Company—Dispute pertains to types and quantum of items that were taken away by thieves and their value—Details of types of garments and fabrics furnished at first instance at the time of registration of FIR to Police were correct—FIR regarding burglary had been lodged with Police and information had also been given to Insurance Company—Second surveyor has given adequate explanation and justification for stock position on date of incident—Insurance Company should have accepted loss as assessed by second Surveyor—Complaint partly allowed. (Paras 7, 8, 14, 15 and 16)

       

ORDER

S.K. Naik, Member—This original petition has been filed by M/s Sahib Exports India against the New India Assurance Company Limited, the opposite party, with the prayer to – (i) declare and hold the opposite party-Insurance Company grossly deficient and negligent in its services, (ii) grant actual losses/damages of Rs.44,17,999/- with interest, (iii) grant compensation of Rs.10,00,000/-; and (iv) grant pendente lite and future interest @ 18% per annum on the amount of actual losses/damages.

Facts as alleged by the Complainant:

The complainant is a registered partnership firm engaged in the business of manufacturing and exporting high quality fashionable readymade garments, fabrics etc. to various foreign countries. The stitching plant and finishing plant of the complainant firm are situated at 198-A, Neb Sarai, New Delhi-110068 and the garments manufactured by it are classified in two categories viz. (i) Sample Category and (ii) Finished Category. The garments in the Sample Category are very expensive products as the prospective buyers place their orders on the basis of evaluation of the quality of the garments under this category. When an order is placed by the buyer, then according to his choice based on the concerned sample, the garments of required quantity are prepared, which are classified as Finished Category garments. To safeguard their business involving expensive garments and fabrics the complainant firm procured a comprehensive insurance policy, namely, “Miscellaneous Accident Insurance Policy” from the opposite party-Insurance Company for the insured value of Rs.50,00,000/- against premium of Rs.28,351/-. The said insurance policy, which was valid and effective w.e.f. 05.01.1998 to the midnight of 04.01.1999. states as under :-

“INSURANCE COVERAGE

BURGLARY (BUSINESS PREMISES) INSURANCE)

SUM INSURED : RS.50,00,000/-

On stock of all kinds of raw material, stock in process, finished goods, semi-finished goods and other allied goods pertaining to the Insured’s trade whilst stored &/or lying in the Insured’s premises occupied as godown-cum-factory (Garment mfg.) built of Ist Class construction, situated at the above mentioned address.”

2. The complainant alleges that by issuing this insurance policy the opposite party-Insurance Company promised to indemnify the complainant in the event of any burglary or house breaking.

3. On 25/26.01.1998, a burglary took place at the complainant’s business premises. In this burglary a gang of unidentified robbers had locked up the night watchman (chowkidar) of complainant firm and carried away assorted merchandise. In the morning of 26.01.1998 the incident of robbery came to notice of the partner of complainant firm, who immediately informed the opposite party-Insurance Company and lodged an FIR with the Police. A letter in this regard was addressed to opposite party-Insurance Company on 28.01.1998. On being informed, the opposite party-Insurance Company appointed Shri H.L. Ahuja to investigate the claim of the complainant. The complainant made available to the investigator the statements of the persons concerned and later the Untraced Report dated 27.04.1998 issued by the Mehrauli Police Station, New Delhi. The opposite party-Insurance Company appointed M/s Atul Kapur & Company as the Surveyors in this case. The complainant also made available all information, documents, statements as desired by the Surveyor. Both the Investigator and the Surveyor inspected the premises of the complainant for on-the-spot assessment of robbery on 11.02.1998. In August, 1998 the opposite party-Insurance Company provided the Burglary Claim Form to the complainant, which was submitted by the complainant, raising a claim of Rs.14,17,999/- on account of loss/damage suffered. On 09.07.1999 the opposite party-Insurance Company informed the complainant that claim to the tune of Rs.3,70,241/- has been approved by the competent authority but the complainant did not accept the same alleg



































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
whatsapp-icon Back to top