$~J * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on: 06.11.2025 Judgment pronounced on: 12.03.2026 + O.M.P. (COMM) 568/2016 M/S COSCO BLOSSOMS PVT LTD .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Raman Kapur, Sr. Adv. with Mr Rajinder Wali, Adv.

versus ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD .....Respondent Through: Mr. Pradeep Gaur, Mr. Amit Gaur, Ms. Sweta Sinha, Advs.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASMEET SINGH

J U D G M E N T

1. This is a petition filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (“the Act”), seeking to challenge the Arbitral Award dated 17.03.2012 (“Award”) passed by the learned Sole Arbitrator.

FACTUAL MATRIX AS PER THE PETITIONER

2. The petitioner, namely M/s Cosco Blossoms Pvt. Ltd., is a registered private limited company engaged in the business of floriculture. The company at the relevant time was primarily a 100% export oriented company exporting its flowers in foreign markets in Europe, Japan, etc.

3. For the purpose of operating its floriculture business, the petitioner maintained several greenhouses built on area measuring 15 acres situated at Village Goyla, Sub-Tehsil Tauru, Gurgaon, Haryana.

4. The company catered to the demands of the high-end flowers market abroad, and to ensure high quality standards, the process/technique of production, cultivation and all other necessary equipment were imported from various countries, primarily the UK, Holland and Israel.

5. Greenhouses were the essential component for the cultivation process.

The structure of each greenhouse was made of galvanized steel (imported from Israel) containing 17 bays. Each bay measured 7.5 meters wide, 40 meters long, and 3.5 meters in height. The top portion of each bay was made up of UVA Stabilized polyethylene sheets measuring 8.5 meters wide and 46 meters long, which were also imported from Israel.

6. The entire setup of greenhouse structure consisted of 131 high quality polyethylene sheets imported from Azrom Metal Industries Ltd., Israel and other foreign companies. Each such sheet was designed to withstand any high speed winds up to 60km/hr and to allow only a specific measured amount of sunshine exposure to the plants. The nature of plantations in this business required maintenance of appropriate temperature and humidity.

7. The respondent, namely Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., is an Insurance Company from which the petitioner had availed two insurance policies bearing Policy No. 211300/47/98/00002 (“Policy 1”) and Policy No. 211300/000/00000/11/13/98/05088 (“Policy 2”).

These policies were operative for the period of 12 months, i.e.

07.08.1997 to 06.08.1998.

8. The Policy 1 covered items such as plants, saplings, roses, and inputs, while the Policy 2 covered other physical assets such as equipment in the greenhouses. The present dispute emanates from policy 2, namely the fire and miscellaneous insurance policy.

9. On the evening of 02.06.1998, severe high winds and rainfall struck the greenhouses of the petitioner. The directors of the company were informed, and they reached the site immediately. They discovered that a substantial number of polyethylene sheets had suffered serious damage, were either torn or blown away, thereby also damaging the plants.

10. The directors of the company made several efforts to repair the damaged sheets to reduce the resultant damage to the plants with the help of the villagers, however a second wave of high winds and rain struck the greenhouse of the petitioner again on 04.06.1998. The directors again organised their efforts to repair the damage done on

04.06.1998.

11. The respondent was informed by the petitioner company vide letter dated 05.06.1998 about the loss and damage suffered by them and their greenhouses. On 5.06.1998, some more sheets were replaced.

12. Pursuant thereto, the surveyor deputed by the respondent namely Mr.

J.K. Sharma visited the site on 06.06.1998 to assess the damage done to the material of the greenhouses. The repair work of the said greenhouses continued on 06.06.1998,