Date of filing : 23.05.2017.

IN THE TAMIL NADU STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHENNAI Present: Hon’ble Thiru Justice R.SUBBIAH ... PRESIDENT C.C. No.230 of 2017 Orders pronounced on: 31.01.2025 KTV Health Food P. Ltd., Rep. by its authorized Signatory – S.Durai Babu, No.48/310, Thambu Chetty Street, Chennai 600 001. … Complainant vs.

1.The National Insurance Co. Ltd., Rep. by the Senior Divisional Manager, DO II, No.16, State Bank Road, Coimbatore 641 018.

2.The National Insurance Co. Ltd., Rep. by the Chief Regional Manager, Coimbatore Regional Office, Coimbatore Stock Exchange Towers, 2^nd Floor, No.684, Trichy Road, Coimbatore 641 005.

3. The National Insurance co. Ltd., Rep. by the Chairman and Managing Director, Head Office, No.3 Middleton Street, Kolkatta 700 071, West Bengal. … Opp. Parties.

For Complainant : Mr.Arvind Subramanian, Sr. Counsel for M/s.R.Ramani For Opp. Parties : M/s.Nageswaran &

Narichania This Complaint came up for final hearing on 28.08.2023 and, after hearing the arguments of the counsels for the parties and perusing the materials on record and having stood over for consideration till this day, this Commission passes the following:-

O R D E R

R.Subbiah, J. President .

–

Alleging service deficiency against the OPs herein/Insurance Company that it had unfairly repudiated their admissible insurance claim arising from the Marine Open Cover Policy by resorting to unfair trade practice and in clear deviation of the IRDAI Regulations, the Insured/Company have come up with this present Complaint, seeking to direct the OPs to pay to them a sum of Rs.23,11,058/- with interest @ 15% on the said amount from 25.04.2014 till 15.05.2017 that comes to Rs.33,70,979/- along with future interest at the same rate from 16.05.2017 till realization and another sum of Rs.50,000/- for transportation & other charges incurred by the complainant and Rs.1 lakh towards compensation for the mental agony caused by the OPs, besides a sum of Rs.15,000/- towards litigation expenses.

2. In brief, the case of the complainant is as follows:-

The complainant is doing the business of importing edible oils from overseas to India and manufacturing/selling the finally refined product in the Southern States. For coverage of Import/Export of Edible Oil and Fats, after being approached by the 1st OP, the complainant took Marine Open Cover Policy (in short MOC Policy) bearing No.6502001300002 from the said OP and it was valid from 01.04.2013 to 31.03.2014. The said Cover, which was as per Institute Cargo Clause (ICC)-A and Bulk Oil Clause Terms, was taken against all kinds of risks to the subject-matter / oil imported through Vessels. Apart from import voyages, the policy, by virtue of the terms and conditions as mentioned in the MOU which is a part thereof, also covers inland transits from warehouse to warehoue. In order to cover certain unspecified losses, Trade Losses, General Leakage, etc., Excess has been fixed at 0.25% of the Bill of Lading (in short BL) quantity and the insurance premium as Rs.0.03 on the sum Insured per Rs.100/- and the same is mentioned on the Policy Open Cover Certificate as well as in the MOU.

The complainant is continuously taking this type of policy since similar previous claims had been duly considered and settled by the Insurance Company. After issuance of the insurance cover, whenever the Vessel carrying the cargo commences its voyage, it is the usual practice of the Company to intimate the 1st OP/Insurance Company to insure the Cargo/Vessel upon providing various particulars like BL, Quantity, Load Port, Discharge Port/Arrival Port, Final Destination, Invoice value, Currency Exchange Value, Commodity, Expected Date of Arrival etc. and, in this instance, the subject-matter viz., 7999.888 Mt. of Palmolein purchased from Wilmar International P. Ltd. at Singapore and meant to be carried by vessel-GALAXY V.07/13 after its loading on 04.10.2013, was insured under the aforesaid MOC along with an MOU, after paying p