ORDER

Dr. Inder Jit Singh, Member—The present Complaint has been filed under Section 21 (a) (i) of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short ‘the Act’) by the Complainant against Opposite Party (OP) as detailed above, inter alia praying for:—

(i) To direct the Respondent, to immediately process the entire claim of the Complainant pertaining to “Package Policy in line with Bankers’ Indemnity Policy” bearing No. 76060346122400000056 dated 12.01.2013.

(ii) To direct the respondent to “disburse” the claim amount of Rs. 66,99,342/-(Rupees Sixty Six lakhs ninety nine thousand three hundred forty two only) to the Complainant, alongwith interest @ 18% p.a., with effect from 17.06.2013, till realization.

(iii) To award a sum of Rs. 35,00,000/- in favour of the Complainant, and against the Respondent, as compensation/damages, on account of the harassment, agony, loss of reputation suffered by the Complainant Company due to the deficiency in service on the part of the Respondent.

(iv) To award the cost of the present proceedings, in favour of the Complainant Company and against the Respondents.

2. Notice was issued to OP on 30.05.2018 giving them 30 days time to file written statement. Written statement by OP was filed on 18.07.2018, Complainant filed their rejoinder on 13.03.2019.

3. It is averred/stated in the Complaint that:—

(i) The Complainant availed a “Package Policy in line with Bankers’ Indemnity Policy” from the Opposite Party covering the risk of it’s various branches all over the Country for the period 12.01.2013 to 11.01.2014 for Total sum insured (S.I.) of Rs.102 Crores /-.

(ii) On 11.06.2013, at about 02:10 PM an incident of armed dacoity took place at the Complainant’s Branch situated at P.P. Road, opposite Alka Cinema, Buxar, causing heavy loss of gold ornaments, cash and other items in the Branch to the Complainant. The Complainant computed a total loss of Rs 66,99,342/-,( including 2123.90 grams of gold, Rs.1,94,894/- as cash, DVR, CCTV camera etc.)

(iii) As per the procedure, the Complainant registered an FIR bearing No.265/2013 under Section 395 IPC in the Durgapur Police Station and informed the Opposite Party about the incident on 11.06.2013. Some of the robbers/ dacoits were arrested by the Police. On receipt of information, the Insurance Company appointed Mr. R.C. Bajpai Surveyor and Investigator to assess loss and investigate the claim.

(iv) OP vide letter dated 02.11.2016 communicated to Complainant that after the inspection of surveyor and terms of the policies the total amount that has been approved is Rs.17,04,024/-.(Assessed loss at Rs.38,66,114/- and settled claim amount at 60% of assessed loss i.e Rs 23,19,668/- and further deducted Rs 6,00,000/-on account of alleged policy excess and further deducted sum of Rs 15,645/- on alleged reinstatement premium)

(v) Computations and calculations of OP are baseless, fallacious and arbitrarily made and asked to be accepted by the Complainant and an inordinate delay of about three and a half year has been done by the OP in giving the partial amount mentioned above, which is unjust and without any cogent reason.

4. The OP in their written statement/reply stated that:—

(i) Each and every allegation of unfair trade practice, delay in providing the assessed loss are denied.

(ii) The Complaint is not maintainable as the Complainant was not a “Consumer” as defined under Section 2 (1) (d) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and the same is without cause of action.

(iii) This Commission lacks pecuniary and territorial jurisdiction to entertain this complaint.

(iv) The present complaint is neither signed nor verified by the competent person and same is liable to be dismissed.

(v) There is no deficiency of service and delay on part of OP, the Complainant was made aware of the stages of processing of claim from time to time.

(vi) The surveyor after assessment an