SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(SCDRC) 3003

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
NUCORE TRANSFORMERS PVT. LTD. – Appellant
Versus
OIC & ORS. – Respondent
SC/7/A/68/2022



Petitioner Advocates:ADYANT LEGAL ,Respondent Advocate:

IN THE DELHI STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION Date of Institution: 04.05.2022 Date of Hearing: 11.02.2026 Date of Decision: 17.04.2026 FIRST APPEAL NO.- 68/2022 IN THE MATTER OF M/S NUCORE TRANSFORMERS PVT. LTD., THROUGH ITS AR/ DIRECTOR, HAVING OFFICE AT: FLAT NO. 208, IIND FLOOR, VISHAL TOWER, DISTRICT CENTRE, JANAKPURI, NEW DELHI – 110058.

(Through: Mr. Kabir Singh Sudan, Advocate)

…Appellant VERSUS

1. ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., REGD. & HEAD OFFICE AT-25/27, ASAF ALI ROAD, NEW DELHI-110002.

(Through: Mr. Bhupesh Kumar Chandna, Advocate)

2. OM FREIGHT FORWARDERS PVT. LTD., OM HOUSE, 847/2 MAIN VASANT KUNJ, ROAD, MATA CHOWK, MAHIPALPUR, DELHI.

3. HYUNDAI MERCHANT MARINE (I) PVT. LTD., 2ND FLOOR, 1 COMMUNITY CENTRE, NEW FRIENDS COLONY, NEW DELHI.

(Through: Lloyd and Johnson)

4. MR. R.M. KAUL, SURVEYOR, ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY, T-C-/20, GROUND FLOOR, VASANT VIHAR.

(Respondent No. 4 in Person)

…Respondents CORAM:

HON’BLE JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL (PRESIDENT)

HON’BLE MS. BIMLA KUMARI, MEMBER (FEMALE) Present: Mr. Kabir Singh Sudan, counsel for the Appellant.

Mr. Bhupesh Kumar Chandna, counsel for the Respondent no. 1.

Appeared through VC.

None for the Respondent No. 2.

Mr. Aman Prasad, counsel for the Respondent no. 3. Appeared through VC.

Respondent no 4. (Mr. R.M. Kaul) in person.

PER: HON’BLE JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL, (PRESIDENT)

JUDGMENT

1. The facts of the case as per the District Commission record are as under:

“…2. In March/April 2016 complainant negotiated with OP5 for supply of Aluminum and Copper Wire Scrap material from China and accordingly placed order for the same. OP5 raised Performa invoice dated 21.03.2016 for supply of 25 Mts of Copper Wires Scrap amounting to USD 96,875/-. Goods were duly inspected before shipment and pre-shipment inspection certificate was issued. After inspection and certification OP5 raised a commercial invoice no. JRL0237/2016 dated 05.04.2016 for 25.12 mts for the supply of the goods i.e. Copper wire scrap to the complainant along with the requisite packing list. Complainant got the consignment of 25.12 mts of Copper wire scrap as per invoice referred above dated 05.04.2016 insured for a sum of INR 68,99,252/- from OP1 vide insurance policy bearing no. 131201/21/2017/3 dated 07.04.2016. Complainant supplied all the requisite documents to OP1. Subsequent to issuance of pre-shipment inspection certificate and certificate of quality, OP2 issued the in house Bill of Lading bearing no. OMCH000832A and OP3 issued Master Bill of Lading bearing no. XGID0415773 indicating the place of delivery as ICD Dadri, India and reflecting the original seal for Copper wire scrap. However, shockingly on arrival of the cargo to the destination port original seal was found to be replaced with a false and fabricated seal. Complainant with other stakeholders conducted joint inspection and during inspection it was noted that-

a) The seal no. HD2868404/080471 had been replaced with a false and fabricated Seal no. 314853 on the container nо.

THRU2258966.

b) The goods being 25.12 mts of Copper wire scrap were missing and instead the container was found to have cement bricks, wooden pallets and mere 100 grams Copper wire.

Complainant lodged a claim of Rs. 68,99,252/- being the sum insured, with OP1 but OP1 did not the surveyor report to the complainant and arbitrarily closed the case under the head "no claim". Complainant has prayed to this commission to-

a) "To set aside the repudiation letter dated 31.03.2019 issued by the Respondent No. 1;

b) To award an amount of Rs. 68,99,252/-(being the sum insured) along with interest @ 18% p.a., starting from the date of submission of claim till actual payment;

c) To direct the Respondent No. 4 to refund back the amount being charged as the Surveyor fees along with interest @ 18% p.a., starting from the date of the payment till actual payment;

d) To direct the Respondent no. 1and Respondent no. 4 to jointly pay an amount of INR 10,00,000/- (Ten Lakhs only) on account of mental

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