Back
SUBHASH CHANDRA, J. RAJENDRA
Jindal Poly Films Limited – Appellant
Versus
National Insurance Co. Ltd. – Respondent
ORDER
AVM J. Rajendra, AVSM VSM (Retd.), Member—This Consumer Complaint has been filed under Section 21 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (“the Act”) against the National Insurance Co Ltd (‘the Opposite Party - OP) seeking to direct the OP:—
a) To pay a sum of Rs.3,61,05,784/- along with the interest @ 18% till the date of realization;
b) To pay a sum of Rs.50,00,000/- to the Complainants for causing undue mental and physical pain, agony and harassment to the Complainant;
c) To pay Rs.2,00,000/- on account of the cost and Litigation Expenses;
d) To pass such other order(s) which this Commission as deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case in favour of the complainants and against the OP.
2. Brief facts of the case as contended in the complaint are that the complainant is a Public Ltd Company engaged in manufacturing of BOPP Films and BOPET Films, with Head Office in New Delhi and a manufacturing plant in Nashik. The company obtained a Standard Fire & Special Perils Policy from the OP (insurance company) for the safety of its goods. The policy No. 350100/11/12/3400000047 was valid from 01.05.2012, to 30.04.2013, with a total coverage of Rs.220 crores.
Insurance policy – Exclusion clause – Burden of proof is on the insurer to show that case falls within the purview of exclusion clause – In case of ambiguity, benefit goes to insured.
“Repudiation of insurance claim on ground of exclusion clause in the policy, since not expressly conveyed to the insured, amounts to deficiency in service.”
Insurance claims must be assessed justly, with surveyor reports not being conclusive and subject to scrutiny.
The court enforced the principle that ambiguities in insurance policies favor the insured, ruling against the insurer for failing to adequately disclose exclusions.
Insurance companies must provide substantial proof when denying claims; unjust repudiation leads to enforceable obligations to pay agreed amounts.
Assessment - In absence of details relating to stage of production of items, the Surveyor was justified in considering the semi-finished cost rate at 50% of finished cost rate on an average of 50% co....
IMPORATNT POINT Appointment of Surveyor – Insured can also appoint a Surveyor or loss accessor.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
