NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, NEW DELHI
C. Viswanath, Presiding Member and Ram Surat Ram Maurya, Member
VFC Industries Pvt. Limited. – Complainant
versus
New India Assurance Company
Limited and Ors. – Opp. Parties
Consumer Case No.33 of 2008
Decided on 5.8.2022
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 – S.21(1)(a)(i)[Consumer Protection Act, 2019 – S.58(1)(a)(i)] – Services – Insurance – Repudiation of Claim – Surveyor Report – delay in settlement of the Claim Amount - the surveyor report is not a sacrosanct. Its validity can be challenged on the basis of evidence on record. The dispute between the parties is in respect of quantum of the loss/claim. So far as delay in settlement of the claim is concerned, the surveyor submitted Final Survey Report on 26.02.2007 - After receiving Final Survey Reports, the Insurer had to take decision within one month under Regulation-9 of The Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority (Protection of Policyholder’s Interest) Regulations, 2002 – Thus, The Insurer took unreasonable time in settlement of the claim after, receiving Survey Reports and made settlement on 26.02.2008 – Thus, the Insurer is liable to pay interest @9% per annum on Rs.94909909/- from June 2007 to February, 2008. The Insurer is liable to be further interest @9% per annum on the amount of the interest so calculated from March, 2008 till its payment - the complaint is partly allowed. The opposite party is directed to pay interest @9% per annum on Rs.94909909/- from June 2007 to February, 2008 and further interest @9% per annum on the amount of the interest so calculated from March, 2008 till its payment, within a period of two months from the date of this judgment. [Para 9 to 10].
Result: Complaint allowed.
ORDER
Heard Mr. Joy Basu, Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. Saurajay Nanda, Advocate, for the complainant and Mr. Vishnu Mehra, Advocate, for the opposite party.
2. VFC Industries Pvt. Ltd. (the Insured) has filed above complaint, for directing New India Assurance Company Limited (the Insurer) to pay (i) Rs.75893911/- with interest @18.25% per annum from April, 2006 till the date of realization, as the part insurance claim, (ii) Rs.3794695/- as exemplary damages, (iii) interest @18.25% per annum on Rs.94909909/- from April, 2006 till 26.02.2008, (iv) cost of litigation and (v) any other relief which is deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.
3. The facts as stated in the complaint and emerged from the documents attached with it are as follows:—
(a) VFC Industries Pvt. Ltd. (the Insured) was a company, registered under Indian Companies Act, 1956 and engaged in manufacture and sale/export of packaging material, having its factory at Survey No.3, village Baska, Taluka Halol, district Panchmahal. Its products inter alia include multi-colour folding box board mono, display cartons, flexible packaging, sleeves and pouches amongst others. The Insured had two divisions, namely carton division and flexible packaging division. It had consistent financial and commercial track record with its products having an excellent reputation in market both local and foreign.
(b) New India Assurance Company Limited (the opposite party) (the insurer) was a public insurance company and engaged in the business of providing insurance services. The Insured obtained four policies from the Insurer i.e. (i) Standard Fire and Special Perils Policy No.220300/11/05/00018 for the period of 01.04.2005 to 31.03.2006, for sum insured of Rs.2.50/- crores on Main Process Building & New PVC Film Manufacturing Building, (ii) Standard Fire and Special Perils Policy No. 220300/11/05/00019, for the period of 01.04.2005 to 31.03.2006, for sum insured of Rs.26.50/- crores on Plant & Machinery in Main Process Building & New PVC Film Manufacturing Building, (iii) Standard Fire and Special Perils Policy No.220300/11/05/00020 for period of 01.04.2005 to 31.03.2006, for sum insured of Rs.7.50/- crores on Stocks Finished goods, raw materials and other material in Main Process Building and raw materials in New PVC Film Manufacturing Building and (iv) Standard Fire and Special Perils Policy No.220300/11/05/00021 for period of 01.04.2005 to 31.03.2006, for sum insured of Rs.6/- crores on Stock and Stock in process in Main Process Building.
(c) On 07.12.2005 around 22:00 hours, Security Supervisor of the Insured, noticed unusual brightness, in the dispatch area situated in the Main Process Building and upon investigation, he found that there was fire in Bonded Stock Room in Main Process Building. The workers tried to douse the fire with fire extinguishers but the fire soon took devastating nature and became uncontrolled. They immediately informed Fire Service Station Kalol about the fire incident on telephone. Messages of fire were also given to Baroda Municipal Corporation, Gujarat State Fertilizers & Chemicals Ltd., Godhra Nagar Palika, Gujarat Oil Refinery and local police, from where, several fire tenders were deputed on the spot, which doused the fire till 14:00 hours on the next day.
(d) The Insured informed the Insurer about fire incident on 07.12.2005. The Insurer appointed Sirish Desai & Associate as the preliminary surveyor, who inspected the spot and submitted Preliminary Survey Report dated 14.12.2005, confirming cause of fire as accidental electric short circuit and estimated loss of Rs.29.75/- crores. The Insurer appointed J.P. Mistry Surveyor, Mumbai as the surveyor on 08.12.2005. The surveyor inspected the premises on 13.12.2005 and 14.12.2005, took photographs, prepared inventory, recorded statements of Ramesh Ramprasan Tripathi, Security Supervisor and other witnesses. He asked for various documents from the Insured for assessment of los
Sri Venkateswara Syndicate vs. Oriental Insurance Company Ltd.
Sri Venkateswara Syndicate vs. Oriental Insurance Company Ltd.
(1) Appellant/Insurer did not disclose the name of the officer, who had settled the claim nor adduced any evidence in this respect.(2) Although the stock of spare parts as submitted by the Appellant/....
Insured is entitled to interest at 9% for delays beyond stipulated time frames following an accepted insurance claim settlement.
Insurers must substantiate their claim settlements and cannot rely on acceptance of prior inadequate offers without fully disclosing material information.
Insurance claims must be assessed justly, with surveyor reports not being conclusive and subject to scrutiny.
Insurance companies cannot avoid liability by citing external compensations, and second surveyors must be appointed with regulatory oversight.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.