SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Del) 46290

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
M/S DHAWAN BOX SHEET CONTAINERS PVT LTD – Appellant
Versus
NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD – Respondent
CS(COMM)-241/2019



##PAGE1##

$~69

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

Date of decision: 22nd DECEMBER, 2025

IN THE MATTER OF:

+ CS(COMM) 241/2019

M/S DHAWAN BOX SHEET CONTAINERS PVT LTD .....Plaintiff

Through: Mr. Aayush Malhotra and Mr.

Shobhit Garg, Advocates

versus

NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD .....Defendant

Through: Mr. Sushant Kishore, Advocate

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD

JUDGMENT (ORAL)

I.A. 47269/2024

1. The present application under Order XI Rule 1(5) of the Commercial

Courts Act, 2015 read with Section 151 of the CPC 1908 has been filed by

the Plaintiff for placing on record additional documents.

2. The present Suit is one for Recovery of ₹1,30,15,020/- along with

pendente lite and future interest and costs.

3. The facts of the case reveals that the Plaintiff Company is engaged in

the business of manufacturing plain and printed corrugated boxes. It is stated

that the Plaintiff operates its business from one of its premises at A-455,

RIICO Industrial Area, Chopanki, Bhiwadi, District Alwar, Rajasthan

(hereinafter referred to as ‘insured premises). It is stated that in order to

secure its industrial assets, the Plaintiff obtained a Standard Fire and Special

Perils Policy bearing No. 350304/11/10, from the Defendant herein. It is

Signature Not Verified

Signed By:HARIOM CS(COMM) 241/2019 Page 1 of 9

SINGH KIRMOLIYA

Signing Date:23.12.2025

10:14:03

##PAGE2##

stated that the Policy was valid from 16.05.2010 to 15.05.2011. It is stated

that under the said Policy, assets aggregating to Rs.9,85,00,000/- were

insured by the Defendant covering the building, plant and machinery,

electrical installations and stocks. It is stated that in order to secure its

assests, the Plaintiff paid a premium of Rs.1,02,561/-. It is stated that during

the validity of the policy, the sum insured was further enhanced by

Rs.50,00,000/- on account of increase in the value of plant and machinery .

4. It is stated that on 24.12.2010 at about 1:15 PM, a fire broke out at the

insured premises of the Plaintiff, allegedly due to an electrical short circuit

in the rear shed of the unit. It is stated that the fire spread rapidly,

necessitating the intervention of the local fire brigade and police authorities,

and could be brought under control only after considerable effort. As a result

of the said fire incident, extensive damage was caused to the Plaintiff’s

building, plant and machinery, electrical fittings and stocks. It is stated that a

substantial portion of the insured premises was completely gutted in the fire.

5. It is stated that the Plaintiff promptly intimated the Defendant

Company about the occurrence of the fire and lodged its claim in accordance

with the terms of the policy of the insurance. It is stated that the Defendant

appointed surveyors to assess the loss. It is stated that the Surveyors visited

the site and carried out inspection and assessment. It is stated that upon

evaluation, the Plaintiff quantified its total loss on account of the fire at

Rs.5,09,68,804/-, comprising damage to the building, plant and machinery,

stocks and electrical installations, and submitted the requisite claim form

and supporting documents to the Defendant.

6. According to the Plaintiff, despite full cooperation and compliance

with all policy requirements, the Defendant failed to settle the claim in

Signature Not Verified

Signed By:HARIOM CS(COMM) 241/2019 Page 2 of 9

SINGH KIRMOLIYA

Signing Date:23.12.2025

10:14:03

##PAGE3##

accordance with law and withheld the amount payable under the Policy.

Consequently, the Plaintiff, pursuant to a Board Resolution dated

24.12.2012, instituted the present suit through its authorised Director

seeking recovery of Rs.1,30,15,020/-, along with pendente lite and future

interest and costs.

7. Summons were issued and Written Statement was filed. Issues were

framed on 24.08.2016. Cross-examination of PW-2 is going on and the

Plaintiff’s evidence has not yet concluded.

8. This application under Order XI Rule 1(5) of the Commercial Courts

Act, 2015 has been filed by the Plaintiff for placing on

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top