Insurance policies cover specified perils, and claims should not be repudiated without clear exclusion clauses.

1. The present Complaint is filed under S.21(a)(1) of the Consumer Protection Act , 1986.

2. Complainant is a Public Limited Company engaged in the business of manufacturing of liquor. The Complainant had a glass plant at Sahibabad Industrial Area, Ghaziabad. The Complainant also launched Binnie's potato chips and PET containers. In order to cover the risk to building, plant & machinery, furniture - fixture, electric installation and office equipments, the Complainant purchased Standard Fire & Special Perils Policy No. 351600/11/10/3400000125 with add on earthquake and terrorism cover, along with reinstatement value for a sum of Rs.3,91,52,98,214 from the Opposite Parties. The Complainant also took Fire Declaration Policy No. 351600/11/10/3400000117, covering the risk for insured stock and stock in process with add on earthquake and terrorism cover for a sum of Rs.77,96,00,000, out of which Rs.4,00,00,000 was for stock of molasses stored in the tanks. Both Policies were valid from 3.8.2010 to 2.8.2011.

3. Case of the Complainant is that on 12.03.2011, at about 12.15 noon, suddenly a loud sound was heard followed by flowing of molasses stored in over ground MS tank. The driver and helpers who had brought molasses for unloading also sustained injuries and were admitted in the nearby hospital and one of the workers died. The explosion and force of molasses was so devastating that the tanker also turned turtle. The Complainant immediately intimated the incident to the Police and the Opposite Parties. The Complainant lodged claim for loss of building, plant & machinery, electrical equipments and molasses, including molasses recovery expenses, apart from damage of civil works / buildings. The Opposite Parties deputed M/s Select Surveyors Pvt. Ltd. to carry out the preliminary survey and M/s Adarsh Associates for assessment of loss. The Complainant completed all necessary formalities and also submitted documents sought by the Surveyors. M/s Select Surveyors Pvt. Ltd. submitted Preliminary Survey Report dated 1.4.2011. M/s Adarsh Associates, Surveyors and Loss Assessors submitted Final Survey Report on 1.5.2012 assessing the loss at Rs.1,30,41,699 against the claim of Rs.4,05,15,464. Despite repeated requests, the Opposite Parties did not settle the claim of the Complainant. On 14.11.2011, the Complainant moved an application under RTI to know the status of the claim. The Opposite Parties, vide letter dated 27.2.2014, repudiated the claim on the ground that the molasses tank burst due to weakening of MS Plates / weld joints due to heavy / deep pitting from inside, mainly at the bottom of the tank and the tank was unable to hold the pressure of molasses stored. Alleging deficiency on part of the Opposite Parties, the Complainant filed the instant Consumer Complaint with the following prayer:
"(i) Hold that the complainant is entitled for an amount as claimed in claim bill and direct the respondents to disburse amount of Rs.4,05,15,464 towards the loss along with interest @ 12% p.a. from the date of loss till the date of actual disbursement.
(ii) Grant exemplary damages of Rs.50,00,000 on account of deficient services and unfair trade practices;
(iii) Grant litigation expenses to the extent of Rs.3,30,000.
(iv) Pass any other orders or directions as deemed appropriate in the facts and circumstances of the case."

4. The Opposite Parties contested the Complaint on the ground that the claim of the Complainant was repudiated on the basis of recommendations of the Surveyor and technical investigations. On receiving intimation of loss, the Opposite Parties deputed Pr