Court emphasized adherence to insurance policy terms and appropriateness of delay condonation under Consumer Protection Act.

1. The present Appeal is filed by the Appellant / Opposite Party against the order passed by the West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kolkata (for short “State Commission”) in Consumer Complaint No. 62 of 2011 dated 15.10.2014.

2. Along with the Appeal IA / Nil / 2015 an application for condonation of delay of 88 days has also been filed by the Appellant. For the reasons mentioned in the application and in the interest of justice, application is allowed and delay condoned.

3. Complainant No.1 is engaged in the business of exploration, development and productionand Coal Bed Methane. Opposite Party No.1 is a Nationalised Insurance Company and Respondent No.2 is an insurance agent of Respondent No.1, a proforma party. Case of the Complainant is that on 9.5.2007 they took Marine Policy No.100701/21/07/4300000019 insuring Mobile Rig (RD20 Atlas Copco) along with accessories and spares for Coal Bed Methane (CBM) Gas scheduled to be shipped from Houston, Texas to Asansol, West Bengal for sum insured of Rs. 4,96,10,000. The Policy covered among others “all water damages including rain damages”. The Complainant purchased the Rig along with accessories and spares from its manufacturer at Houston, Texas which was shipped to Asansol, West Bengal via Mumbai Port by a Vessel named SAUDI HOFUF – V - 132. On 23.6.2007, the consignment was discharged at Mumbai, Ballard Pier Extension, Indira Docks for onward road transport to Asansol and the said ship was waiting inspection and clearance from the Custom Authorities at Mumbai Port. The Rig was parked in the open. After clearance from the Authorities, the supplier of the Indian Representatives, M/s. Atlas Copco, who was called on July 15, 2007 for inspection, noticed that the diesel engine did not respond on ignition as rain water had entered the engine crank casing through the exhaust pipe due to heavy rainfall at Mumbai.

4. The Surveyor J.B. Boda Surveyors Pvt. Ltd. asked the Insurance Broker M/s. Howden Insurance Brokers India Pvt. Ltd. to inform all parties concerned regarding survey of the said Rig. After survey, the Rig was transported to M/s GMMCO Ltd. Nagpur for repairing. During the joint inspection on 22.8.2008 by the Surveyor at Nagpur, it was found that various parts of the diesel engine got affected due to the rain water and were to be replaced. After incurring an expenditure of Rs. 15,71,457 towards repair of the said Rig, it was transported to Asansol its final destination. On 4.1.2008, the Complainant filed insurance claim of Rs. 15,71,457 with Respondent No.1 along with all the necessary documents. Thereafter, the Complainant pursued the matter with Opposite Party No.1. The claim was repudiated by the Opposite Party on 5.5.2009. Thereafter on 26.5.2009, a legal notice was served by the Counsel for the Complainant upon the Opposite Party No.1. On 8.10.2009, Opposite Party No.1 replied to the said legal notice and rejected the claim of the Complainant. Alleging deficiency in service despite on the part of Opposite Party No.1, the Complainant filed a Complaint in the State Commission with the following prayer:
“(a) Compensation and / or damages for a sum of Rs. 27,72,949 as pleaded in paragraph 31 herein to be paid to the Complainant by the respondent No. 1
(b) Interest @ 18% per annum as pleaded in paragraph 32 herein until realization.
(c) Costs of an / or incidental to this Complaint be paid by the respondent No. 1
(d) Such further or other order / o