IMPORTANT POINT
Violation of terms and conditions – FIR Annexure ‘K’ was registered only on 02.09.2011 about two weeks after discovery of loss of jewellery – Therefore the complainant has failed to comply with the terms and conditions of the insurance policy.

ORDER

Bimla Kumari, Member (Female)—Brief facts of the case are that the complainant is a company engaged in the business of the manufacturing and sale of diamond jewellery and other related items. It has various showrooms (branch offices) all across the country with its Head Office at 2708 Bank Street, Karol Bagh, New Delhi. The complainant company obtained a ‘Jewellers Block Policy’ No. 31120046110700000003 for the period w.e.f. 30.06.2011 to 29.06.2012 for a total sum of 3,100,000,000/-. The policy is specifically designed by the insurance industry to suit the needs and requirements of jewellers and their risks involved. The terms and conditions of the policy are mentioned in the schedule which is annexed as (Annexure ‘D’). The copy of cover note of the above mentioned insurance policy alongwith policy schedule is annexed as (Annexure ‘E’).

2. It is the case of complainant that on 20.08.2011 its three employees, namely, Mr Nilesh Vyas and Mr Abhijeet Dadich working for Pali Branch and Mr Sunil Vyas, working for Bhilwara Branch of the Complainant CNO.565/2014 company took the ensured jewellery from the Head Office, at Karol Bagh, for carrying the same to its Pali and Bhilwara Branch, which was a routine exercise conducted by the company. The jewellery was duly invoiced vide bill No.03134, 03135, 03113, all invoices dated 20.08.2011. Copy of these invoices is annexed (Annexure ‘F’ Colly). The above mentioned jewellery was carried by the employees in safe and secure bags and they left the showroom at around 7/7.30 PM on 20.08.2011 and took an auto rickshaw from the main road for Hanuman Mandir, Karol Bagh, where they unloaded the bags from the auto rickshaw and stood for about 20-25 minutes at the bus stand, as they were waiting for the bus alongwith other 15-20 people. When the bus came at the bus stand, the alleged three employees boarded the bus and after taking their seats, kept the jewellery bags below their respective seats. The bus stopped at Dharuhera at about 11 PM. Some passengers got down from the bus to take refreshment and for freshening up. But these three employees did not get down from the bus, as they were having strict instructions from the complainant company not to get down at any place.

3. It has further been alleged by the complainant that when the bus started from Dharuhera, the three employees checked the jewellery and the employees Mr Nilesh Vyas and Mr Abhijeet Dadich found that the jewellery kept by them below their seats was safe and secured but the jewellery carried by employee Sunil Vyas worth Rs.18.5 lakhs was found missing. The alleged employees started searching the jewellery in the entire bus including the checking of seats and belongings of other passengers, who were sitting in the bus with the co-operation of the Driver and Conductor of the bus. However, the jewellery was not found anywhere. The alleged three employees of the complainant company informed about the loss to their senior, Mr R K Sharma, at Head Office at about 1.00 AM, who directed the employee to get down from the bus at Jaipur and come back to Head Office by taking a taxi. Accordingly, the alleged three employees got down from the bus and took a taxi at 8.00 AM and came back to Delhi.

4. It is further case of the complainant that it wrote a letter dated 23.08.2011 to the opposite party and mentioned about the loss of jewellery and requested to depute a surveyor. Copy of the letter and claim form are annexed as (Annexure ‘G’ & ‘H’) respectively. An internal clearance letter dated 23.08.2011 was also given by Mr Rao (HR Manager of the complainant company) to the (Senior Executive of the Complainant Company) Mr Rakesh Sharma stating therein that he has interrogated and examined all the three employees and did not find any evidence that they had misappropriated the material and it was a case of loss in transit The said letter is (Annexure ‘I’). Thereafter, Mr R K Sharma lodged a Police complaint (Annexure ‘J’), on the basis of wh