NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSIONHDCF NEW DELHI RESERVED O N: 17/11/2025 JUDGEMENT PRONOUNCED ON : 19/12/2025 FIRST APPEAL NO. 725 OF 2013 (Against the O rder dated 14.08.2013 in Com plaint No. C-172/10 of the State Consum er Disputes Redressal Com m ission Delhi) W ith IA/6514/2013, IA/6515/2013 (Stay, condonation of delay)

New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Regd. & H.O . New India Assurance Building, 87, M ahatm a G andhi Road, Fort, M um bai - 400001, Having its Delhi Regional O ffice-2, Scope Tower-Il, Laxm i Nagar, Delhi - 92. Having its M eerut Divisional O ffice-12, 339, Bom bay Bazar, M eerut - 250001. Having its M eerut Branch O ffice, 201-205, M etro Plaza, Delhi Road, M eerut - 250002.

Through:

The M anager, New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Jeevan Bharti Building, Tower Two, 5th Floor, Connaught Place, New Delhi - 110001. Appellant Versus M /s JSD Classic International Ltd. Regd. O ffice 2365, Street No. 11, Raghubirpura

1, G andhi Nagar, Delhi. Head O ffice a t: 61, Shivaji Road, M eerut and Factory at

37, M ohakam pur Industrial Com plex, Phase-ll, Delhi Road, M eerut ...Respondent BEFORE:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.P. SAHI, PRESIDENT HON’BLE MR. BHARATKUMAR PANDYA, MEMBER For the Appellant : M r. S.M . Tripathi, advocate For the Respondent : M r. A.K. Soni, M r. Pavan Kum ar, Advocates

ORDER

PER BHARATKUMAR PA ND YA. MEMBERONMLKJIHGFEDCBA

1. This appeal by the insurer involves a dispute with regard to indem nification of loss of stocks suffered by it in an incident of fire which took place in the intervening night of 2/3.06.1998. The insured-respondent had obtained two Standard Fire and Special Perils Policies for stocks for total Sum Assured (SA) of Rs. 80 lac under two covernotes. A claim for indem nification to the extent of Rs.89,78,921/- was lodged. The claim was not settled and rem ained pending, as per the com plainant, till 2010 when com plaint before the State Com m ission, Delhi was filed. Learned State Com m ission has partly allowed the com plaint and, as against the relief of indem nification claim ed in the com plaint of insurance claim of Rs.80 lakhs with corresponding interest, has awarded an am ount of Rs.29,60,437/- with interest and further com pensation of Rs. 1.5 lakhs for m ental harassm ent as under:

£

it

25. The next question that needs our consideration is settlement of the claim. Sh. ONMLKJIHGFEDCBA A.K. Govil and Associates, the final Surveyor assessed the loss caused due to fire submitted their report dated 29.9.2000 in which net loss assessed was to the tune on Rs.29,60,437/-. This report regarding loss due to fire was based on the documents and information which were provided by the complainant to the surveyor. Despite clear report of loss to the tune of Rs.29,60,437/-, the insurance Company in its wisdom kept the matter pending without any decision. They were only awoken after the complainant sent a legal notice dated 29.4.2009 to the OP. The OP thereafter sent a reply on 2.6.2009 informing the complainant that as per direction of the Regional Office of the OP, the competent authority reviewed the matter and in the absence of non-submission of required information/documents, construed that the insured had nothing to reply. The Competent authority of the OP, therefore, reiterated its earlier decision of treating the claim as "No claim". For this reason, the claim was not found maintainable. It is interesting to note that both the complainant and the OP have relied upon the ruling of the Hon'ble SC in Sri Venkateswara Syndicate Vs. Oriental Insurance Co.- Ltd. - (2009) 8 SCC 507. In this leading case, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held:

(a) However, if report is prepared in good faith, with due application of mind and in the absence of any error or ill-motive, insurance company cannot reject the report of the surveyors.

(b) The Surveyor/Surveyors are appointed by the insurance company under the provisions of Insurance Act and their reports are to be given due importance and one should have sufficient