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)(SCDRC) 24920

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
M/S ALEMBIC LTD. – Appellant
Versus
THE NEW INDIA ASS. CO. LTD. – Respondent
SC/24/CC/09/09



Petitioner Advocates:S K SHAH ,Respondent Advocate: PALAK THAKKAR

Details DD MM YY
Date of Judgment 16 02 2022
Date of filling 23 03 2009
Duration 24 10 12
BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, GUJARAT STATE AT AHMEDABAD.

Court-3 Complaint NO. 9 of 2009 Dt: 16.02.2022 M/s. Alembic Ltd.

Alembic Road, Baroda. …Complainant Vs.

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd.

Divisional Office-IV, 7th Floor, Suraj Plaza, Sayajiganj, Vadodara. ...Opponent Appearance: Mr. Bhargav Pandya, Ld. Advocate for the Complainant Mr. Palak H. Thakkar, Ld. Advocate for the Opponent Coram: (Shri S. N. Vakil, Judicial Member)

(Smt. J. Y. Shukla, Member)

Order by Shri S.N. Vakil, Judicial Member

1. The complainant – M/s. Alembic Ltd. has filed this complaint against the New India Assurance Co. Ltd., alleging that it is a very old company engaged in business of various kind of medicines/drugs within and outside the country. It had taken Marine Open Cover Policy from the opponent in June 2000, which issued cover note of the policy premium whereof was paid Rs. 10,752/-. The claimant had given some job-work to M/s. Sislax Pharma Pvt. Ltd., Panchkula, Haryana for manufacturing Amoxicillin Tryhydrated and Ampicillin Tryhydrated for a quantity of

1900 Kg and 3500 Kg respectively. The said goods were required to be delivered by the jobber at complainant‟s godown situated at Vadodara. Accordingly the goods were loaded in truck bearing No. HR-38-9595, model TATA-709, the truck was reported to have left the factory of jobber on 05.10.2000, and delivery challan Nos. 15 and 16 dated 05.10.2000 were issued by the jobber along with said goods. On 6.10.2000 at about 2:30 a.m., 3 KM from Saha-Panchkula-Delhi highways the said truck got spark in the engine and it went out of control of the driver. It was reported to have struck against the electric pole gutted in fire with the said consignment. The flames of the fire went about 40 ft. and trees around also got burnt. Driver at the last movement jumped out from the truck and could save himself. The incident was immediately reported to the concerned police station, bearing No. DDR-16 on 6.10.2000 at Saha Police Post, P. S. Mullana, Dist. Ambala. The opponent was immediately informed orally and telephonically as well as in writing with regard to said incident on 6.10.2000 itself. The Regional Office of the opponent deputed the surveyor at Chandigarh who had conducted the survey on 6.10.2000 at 7:15 p.m. The material sent by M/s. Sislax Pharma Pvt. Ltd. before loading into the truck were washed with IPO Propylene Alcohol Solvent which is flammable item. Therefore, at the time of incident the medicine loaded in the truck got burnt immediately and evaporated. Only plastic drums melted due to fire converted into lumps were there at the site of accident in debri of truck. Thus, the whole consignment was damaged totally in fire along with truck and the complainant has sustained huge loss of Rs. 87 lakhs. The detailed claim was submitted with the opponent on 09.10.2000 for an estimated amount of Rs. 87 lakhs. The complainant had provided all the requisite details and documents required series of correspondence containing minute details were exchanged between them after date of accident till the date of filing this complaint. The complainant has surprisingly till date neither rejected the claim nor has paid the money of the claim to the complainant. All the necessary details, documents, information whatever have been sought for, were provided to the opponent or investigator and thereafter also co-operated fully as and when sought for. However, till date the opponent has not came to any conclusion. This is a gross case of negligence and deficiency in services, by the opponent and merely on this ground the complainant is eligible to get sufficient remedy. The claim was lodged in late 2000 however even till 2006-07 the opponent had written the letter to the complainant stating that the claim of the complainant is under consideration with the competent authorities of the opponent shall reve

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