Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(NCDRC) 3210
NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
MR. SUBHASH CHANDRA, PRESIDING MEMBER, AVM J. RAJENDRA, MEMBER
Gurucharan Mica India Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
The New India Assurance Company – Respondent
FIRST APPEAL NO.525 OF 2016 | FIRST APPEAL NO.785 OF 2016
For Gurucharan Mica India Pvt. Ltd. :Mr. Gaurav Agarwal, Advocate and Mr. Sarthak Kalra, Advocate
For New India Assurance Co. Ltd. :Mr. Maibam N. Singh, Advocate
The court established that surveyor's reports are significant yet not binding; arbitrarily dismissing their findings without proper reasoning constitutes deficiency in service.
Headnote:(A) Consumer Protection Act, 1986 - Sections 19 and 24 - Insurance claim - Fire incident - Dispute over the assessment of loss and settlement of claim regarding underinsurance and deductions made by the insurer, leading to enhanced compensation awarded by the Consumer Forum - Both parties appeal against the decision of the State Commission. (Paras 1.4, 8-12, 16)
(B) Appeal - Scope - The Consumer Forum’s jurisdiction regarding the surveyor’s report is limited; it cannot scrutinize it as a civil court would. (Paras 13-14)
(C) Findings on claim settlement - The settlement amount determined should have been Rs.88,40,658 post-deductions as per policy terms. The decision by State Commission to direct higher payment is modified. (Paras 15-16)
Facts of the case:
The appellant’s factory suffered significant loss due to fire, claiming Rs.1,92,70,421 as damages. The insurer settled for Rs.87,21,785 leading to cross appeals for claimed dues and compensation.
Findings of Court:
The court considered the surveyor’s report, the terms of the insurance policy, and ruled on the validity of the deductions made by the insurer.
Issues: The main issues addressed were the appropriateness of the surveyor's assessments and the legality of the insurer's deductions.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that surveyor's reports are integral but not conclusive, and any modifications must be backed by substantial reasoning.
Result: The insurer is directed to pay a modified amount along with interest.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of appeal and consumer complaint. (Para 1 , 2 , 6) |
| 2. claim details and initial assessments. (Para 4 , 5 , 8 , 9) |
| 3. discussion on surveyor's evaluations and legality. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 14) |
| 4. final assessment and decision-making process. (Para 13 , 15) |
JUDGMENT
AVM J. RAJENDRA, AVSM, VSM (RETD.), MEMBER
1. This Order shall decide both the First Appeals No.525 and 785 of 2016 arising from the impugned Order dated 17.02.2016 passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, U.P. (“State Commission”) in Consumer Complaint No. 131 of 2014, wherein the State Commission partly allowed the complaint.
2. As per report of the Registry, there is a delay of 55 days in filing FA No.525 of 2016. In-fact, there is also delay of 73 days in filing of FA No.785 of 2016. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the delay in both the Appeals is condoned.
3. For Convenience, the parties are being referred to as mentioned in the Complaint before the State Commission. Gurucharan Mica India Pvt. Ltd. is the Complainant and New India Assurance Co. Ltd. is the Opposite Party (OP).
4. Brief facts of the case, as per the Complainant, are that the Complainant, M/s. Gurucharan Mica India Pvt. Ltd., is a registered company engaged in manufacturing mica sheets. It had obtained a Standard Fire and Special Perils Insurance Policy No. 420407111100000867 from the OP-Insurance Company for the period 18.01.2012 to 17.01.2013, covering a sum of ₹2.05 crore upon payment of a premium of ₹35,048. On 08.05.2012, a fire broke out at the Complainant‟s factory, causing substantial loss. Consequently, the Complainant filed a claim for ₹1,92,70,421 with the OP. The Insurance Company conducted a survey and, unilaterally, settled the claim for ₹87,21,785, leaving a balance of ₹58,83,171.16 unpaid. Being aggrieved, the Complainant approached the State Commission seeking Payment of the remaining ₹58,83,171.16; Interest @ 18% p.a. on the due amount; Compensation of ₹10 lakhs for damages; and Litigation costs of ₹50,000.
5. Despite proper notice, the OP has failed to file a reply, necessitating ex-parte proceedings.
6. The learned State Commission partly allowed the Complaint vide order dated 17.02.2016 & directed as follows:
ORDER
“The complaint is accepted in part and the Respondent are severally and jointly directed to make payment of Rs.10,82,394.45 (ten lakhs, eighty two thousands and three hundred and ninety four rupees and forty five paise) to the complainant within a period of 2 months and as compensation for the damages the complainant shall be entitled for getting interest @ 12% pa from 03.05.2013 till the actual date of payment. The complainant shall also be entitled to get a sum of Rs. 5,000 (five thousands) separately from the Respondent as litigation expenses.
(Extract from translated copy)
7. Aggrieved by the Order of the State Commission, both the parties i.e., the Complainant and the OP filed the present cross Appeals before this Commission with the following prayer:
FA/525/2016 – filed by the Complainant-Gurucharan Mica India Pvt. Ltd.
A. An order modifying the impugned order dated 17.02.2016 passed by Hon’ble U.P. State Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Lucknow in C.C. No. 131 of 2014 by allowing the C.C. No. 131/2014 filed by the Appellant/Complainant; and
B. An order allowing the costs of the present Appeal to the Appellant/ Complainant; and
C. Any other order or direction that this Commission may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case.
FA/785/2016 – filed by the OP-New India Assurance Co. Ltd.
A. Set aside the impugned order/judgement of the State Commission Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow dated 17.02.2016 passed in Complaint Case No. 131 of 2014;
B. Allow the present appeal;
C. Dismiss the complaint filed by the Complainant before the State Commission, U.T. Chandigarh;
D. Award the costs of the present appeal to the appellant;
E Pass such other and further order(s) as this Hon'ble Commission may deem fit
