IMPORTANT POINTS
(1) Settlement – The insurance Company was required either to accept or reject the report of the surveyor and offer settlement to insured within thirty days.
(2) Surveyor – The report of surveyor is very crucial.

ORDER

S.P. Tavade, President—Complainants are resident of Mandvi Kutch, Gujarat. They are co-owners of vessel called MSV Annasagar. The said vessel was duly registered as a mechanized sailing vessel with post office Gujarat, Maritime Board Mandvi (Kutch) under certificate dated 22/09/2000 under the M.S. Act 1956. The complainants have hired services of M/s. G.P. Dave & Sons carry out survey of their vessel. Accordingly, M/s. G.P. Dave & Sons carried out survey and submitted valuation certificate alongwith survey report to the complainants confirming the value of the vessel.

2. On the basis of valuation report, the complainants obtained insurance of their vessel from the opponent. The complainants paid insurance premium of Rs.17,207/- and insured the vessel for Rs.55,30,000/-. The insurance company replied upon the valuation report and issued policy which was valid between 02/11/2000 and 1/11/2001.

3. It is contended that on 05/11/2000 the vessel of complainants met with an accident whilst on passage from Dubai to Iran. It is contended that the Captain and the Crew member heard some noise and felt something hit at the bottom of the vessel. It is contended that within no time vessel was full of seawater and started sinking. The vessel had total number of 14 people on board. The captain of the vessel instructed the Crew members to pump out the water as quickly as possible. The captain took utmost care to save the vessel from drowning. It is contended that one vessel MSV Kailash came to the rescue of the vessel of complainants. All Crew members were rescued and they boarded the vessel MSV Kailash. Accordingly, captain and all Crew members reached Dubai. Thereafter, they came to Mandvi- Gujarat on 11/11/2000 by vessel MSV Yogeshwar. The vessel Annasagar could not be rescued and it sank in the water.

4. The complainants informed the accident of their vessel to opponent no.2 on phone and also requested opponent no.2 to appoint surveyor to assess the damage. Accordingly, the opponent no.2 had appointed J.Basheer & Associates as a surveyor. The surveyor issued letter dated 08/11/2000 to complainants and sought information of accident and documents of vessel.

5. It is contended that the surveyor visited Mandavi Kutch on 7th and 8th December 2000 in order to conduct survey/investigation into the alleged sinking of vessel on 05/11/2000. During the visit complainants asked the driver of vessel namely Nakhwa to appear before the surveyor. Accordingly, his statement was recorded. The complainants informed the surveyor that vessel Annasagar usually goes to Dubai and was engaged by M/s. Hajipir Trading Company, Hamriya Market, Dubai. It was also informed that in the said season vessel Annasagar had gone to Dubai and had loaded Cargo of dates at Iran, Port Khorramshahr and while coming back to Dubai, the vessel sunk on 05/11/2000.

6. It is contended that the complainants also wrote a letter to Directorate General of Shipping and sent casualty report of the vessel for necessary sanction. It is contended that Shri.Salim Kasam of MSV Yogeshwar visited the office of surveyor. The surveyor recorded the statement of Shri. Salim Kasam. The surveyor also informed the complainants that they were in the process of completing the formalities of MMD, Mumbai.

7. It is contended that the complainants approached the Kachchhi Vahanvati Association to request the Directorate General of shipping to send casualty report of their vessel to Mandvi Port at the earliest. It is contended that surveyor wrote a letter dated 21/11/2001 to complainants and sought certain documents. Accordingly, the complainants visited the office of surveyor on 29/11/2001 and handed over documents sought by them. It is contended that surveyor wrote a letter dated 30/11/2001 to complainants and confirmed the receipt of documents sought by them. It is contended that the surveyor also wr