Payment to bank not considered as full settlement. Proportionate loss apportionment between insurance companies. Assessment of loss based on relevant records.

ORDER

Mr. R. Lakshminarasimha Rao, Member (Oral)- This appeal is filed by the complainant against the order dated 13th March, 2013 in CC 46/2012 on the file of the District Forum, Kurnool.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant insured the entire stock and furniture, fixtures of his shop with the respondent under "Shopkeepers Insurance Policy bearing No. 433100/48/2011/1964 for Rs. 22,00,000 covering the risk for the period from 27.12.2010 to 26.12.2011. At 6.15 a.m., on 6.3.2011 the shop along with the entire stock worth Rs. 25,00,000 was gutted into fire due to electric short circuit. The S.F.O., Kurnool Fire Station, issued certificate bearing Rc. No. 68/2011 dated 6.3.2011 in that connection and assessed the loss at Rs. 25,00,000. On the appellant's intimation about the fire accident, the respondent appointed a Surveyor who assessed the loss to the tune of Rs. 22,86,289.

3. As the respondent did not pay the insured amount, he got issued notice to the respondent on 24.2.2012. Thereafter, the respondent deposited an amount of Rs. 11,00,000 in the complainant's online bank account. Since the respondent did not pay the remaining balance amount of Rs. 11,86,289 even after issuance of reminder dated 2.4.2012, he filed the complaint seeking direction to the respondent to pay the balance amount of Rs. 11,86,289 with interest @ 24% p.a., Rs. 50,000 towards compensation for mental agony and hardship and costs.

4. The respondent resisted the claim admitting the mishap of fire accident and the validity of the policy on the date of fire accident. It is contended that the Chartered Accountant arrived at Rs. 22,86,289 which is not the actual loss caused due to fire accident and it is the total value of the tradable goods in the shop and stock in the godown. The Surveyor Sri E. Mukund, who surveyed physically both in the affected shop and unaffected Godown arrived at Rs. 15,84,127 for Tradable stock against certified book figures of Rs. 22,86,289 arrived at by Chartered Accountant. On 6.3.2011 the entire stock in the shop was not burnt and the stock that was not burnt in the fire accident could be treated as salvage and can be resold for lesser value.

5. On the basis of the record, photographs and the surveyor's report, etc., the respondent assessed the loss at Rs. 11,94,798 and explained the same to the appellant clearly and he accepted the same and thereafter only the respondent sent a claim payment voucher to the bank which credited the same to the account of the complainant. The respondent after perusal of the entire evidence and following due procedure assessed the loss and made payment to the appellant and as such there is no deficiency of service on its part and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

6. In support of his case, the appellant filed his affidavit, Exs. A-1 and A6 and on behalf of the respondent its Divisional Manager filed his affidavit and Exs. B-1 to B-7.

7. The District Forum dismissed the complaint on the premise that the appellant accepted the claim settlement at Rs. 11,94,798 without any protest and in accordance with the same the respondent credited the settled amount to the account of the appellant and hence there is no deficiency in service on the part of the respondent.

8. Being dissatisfied with the order of the District Forum, the complainant preferred the appeal and contended that the District Forum ought to have observed that the entire stock was effected and become unusable by the fire accident and that the unaffected stocks are not useful and not having any value in the market and failed to consider the entire stock was affected and that it has to be awarded the loss as assessed by the Chartered Accountant at Rs. 22,86,289 and prayed for relief of payment of the balance amount.

9. The point for consideration is whether the order of the District Forum is vitiated by misappreciation of facts or law

10