K.S. Radhakrishnan, J.

1. Plaintiff is the appellant. Suit was instituted for recovery of an amount of Rs.87,04,872/- with 24% interest from the defendants towards insurance claim.We may extract the reliefs sought for by the plaintiff below :

1. To allow the plaintiff to recover a sum of Rs. 62,04872/- with 24% future interest as per Memo of Accounts (A) shown below from the defendantsand their assets through court.

2. To allow the plaintiff to recover a sum of Rs. 25 lakhs as compensation for the reasons stated in para 38 & 39 of the plaint and shown in the Memo of Accounts (B) from the defendants and their assets through court.

3. To allow the plaintiff to recover the cost of the suit from the defendants.

4. To allow such other reliefs to the plaintiff as this Hon'ble Court deems fit andproper in the nature and circumstances of this case.

Trial Court found that the claim was not bona fide and dismissed the suit. Aggrieved by the same this appeal has been preferred.

2. Plaintiff is the sole proprietor Lakshmi Vihar Finance & Investment, Kollam.He is conducting business as a pawn broker under licence No. 847. He is alsoengaged in other business (money lending business, cashewnut business, abkari business and also business in tile industry) for the last three decades.He is an income tax and wealth tax payee. Lakshmi Vihar Finance is conducted in a three storeyed building situated on the side of Kollam -Alleppey National Highway. Plaintiff and members of his family are residing in the same compound at a distance of 60-70 feet from the business premises. Residential building as well as finance company are situated within strong boundary walls on all sides with an iron gate facing towards the public road on the northern side. Plaintiff as we have already indicated is a pawn broker.There were strong iron safes in the building for keeping cash and goldornaments pledged by the pawners. The Iron safes were kept in the 2nd floorof the building. Plaintiff is also a policy holder in connection with his businessas per policy No. 570500/46/05/75/93/00014 dated 16-4-1993 for a sum of Rs.75 lakhs which was valid from 18-4-1993 to 17-4-1994. Plaintiff was taking thepolicy of the like nature from 1992-93 onwards from the third defendantinsurance company.

3. It was noticed that on 8-5-1993 during night time one iron safe kept in the2nd floor of the plaintiffs office building was broke opened and the entire goldornaments kept inside that safe was stollen away by some unknown persons.The gold ornaments of each customer as tied in small pouches and kept insidethe drawer of the iron safe. The other iron safes kept in the same room werefound in tact. On the next day morning it was noticed that the door of the roomin which iron saves were kept was seen opened. Plaintiffs son immediatelyrushed to the spot and informed plaintiff. He also rushed to the spot. Matterwas immediately reported by the plaintiff to the Kollam West Police Stationand police came to the spot with dog squad. Police officials inspected theentire office premises and obtained finger prints and noted other availableevidence. A case was registered by the Kollam West Police as crime No.91/93 on 9-5-1993 itself under S.457, 380 and 461 of the Indian Penal Codebased on the first information statement. West Circle Inspector of Policeprepared a scene mahazar at about 10-30 a.m. on the same day. Onverification of records, registers and books of accounts, the plaintiff found thatgold ornaments wieghing 10630.550 gms. pledged by 735 pawners werestolen away by the burglars. The value of the gold ornaments so lost from hisbusiness comes to Rs. 4401047/-.

4. Plaintiff informed about the burglary to the 3rd defendant insurancecompany. Officers of the insurance company inspected the spot and premisesof the business and as per the directions of the third defendant burglary claimwas made on 11-5-1993 in the prescribed form claiming a sum of Rs.4401047/- towards the value of the gold ornaments stolen a