IMPORTANT POINT
Reduction in amount assessed by the surveyor not a fair practice on part of the insurance company and cannot be accepted to be a good commercial trade practice.

P.N. Kashalkar, Presiding Judicial Member — This is an appeal filed by the Insurance Company against the judgment and award passed by District Consumer Forum, South Mumbai in consumer complaint No.195/2006 decided on 18.9.2008. By the said judgment and award, District Consumer Forum partly allowed the complaint and directed the O.P./Insurance Company to pay the balance amount of Rs.1,90,646 to the complainant and also directed to pay Rs.25,000 as compensation for mental hardships and stress and Rs.10,000 towards cost to the complainant. As such, org. opponent has filed this appeal.

2. The facts to the extent material may be stated as under:

Complainant-Mr. Ashok Sancheti, Proprietor of M/s. Sancheti & Sons of Zaveri Bazzar, Mumbai, had taken Jewellers Block policy for the period 21.8.2002 to 20.8.2003 for the loss or damage of the property insured on various specified grounds including robbery, theft, etc. Total sum assured was Rs.33,00,000 and Rs.32,00,000 respectively under Section I and Section II of the policy. According to the complainant, the policy also included loss of jewellery in possession of his employee. It was the case of the complainant in the District Consumer Forum that his employee Mr. Sudhir Jain was attacked by unknown third person on 3.5.2003 and deprived him of jewellery worth Rs. 7,55,000 belonging to the insured. Despite the best efforts made he could not recover the said goods. FIR was lodged by the complainant. Thereafter, complainant lodged insurance claim with the Insurance Company. Insurance Company appointed Surveyor M/s. Parima R. Shah, who carried out extensive investigation and ultimately, surveyor submitted its report dated 28.3.2004 assessing the net adjusted loss at Rs.7,55,139 incurred by the insured. However, Insurance Company did not immediately pay the said amount. They went on dragging their feet and ultimately, it was the case of the complainant in the District Consumer Forum that because of undue influence and coercion exercised by the Insurance Company’s officials causing delay in settling the claim, the complainant was forced to sign indemnity bond and letter of subrogation and full & final settlement voucher and only thereafter the Insurance Company sanctioned amount of Rs.5,64,354 and handed over the cheque of that amount. Not being satisfied with the way he was dealt with by the Insurance Company, complainant filed consumer complaint against the Insurance Company.

3. In response to the notice, opponent filed written version. Complaint is hit by the commercial purpose. It pleaded that the complainant cannot be said to be a consumer since he had taken policy for his business. The Insurance Company also pleaded that the complainant had not approached the District Consumer Forum with clean hands because he had suppressed the legal notice issued by his Advocate as well as reply given to the said notice by the Insurance Company. Opponent pleaded that it was not legally bound to give compensation as per the recommendation made by the Surveyor in his report. According to the opponent, complainant accepted Rs.5,64,354 without any coercion, fraud, by way of full and final settlement and therefore, complainant is estopped from challenging the settlement between the respondent and the Insurance Company. Opponent pleaded that by way of an afterthought they had filed consumer complaint for getting remaining amount of Rs.1,90,646 which was difference of amount recommended by the Surveyor and the actual amount received by the complainant. Opponent further pleaded that they were justified in part repudiation of the claim because under the caption of Book Keeping, the insured was required to maintain stock of each and every items, but he had not maintained stock register on daily basis and therefore, Insurance Company tried to justify the repudiation of the amount recommended by the Surveyor to the complainant.

4. Upon considering the rival claims and upon perusal of the documents and after he