Back
Details
DD
MM
YY
Date of Judgment
01 02
2021 Date of filling
06 10
2015 Duration
26 04
06
BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
GUJARAT STATE AT AHMEDABAD.
Court-3
APPEAL NO.595 of 2016 Dt: 01.02.2021
1. United India Insurance Co. Ltd.
24, Whites Road,
Chennai.
2. United India Insurance Co. Ltd.
Divisional Office-II,
2nd Floor, Lalita Tower,
Behind Railway Station Dinesh Mill Road,
Baroda.
…Appellants
(Orig. Opp. Nos. 1 &
2) Vs.
1. Harinagar Grahak Suraksha Mandal,
FF-16, First Floor, Saikruti Complex,
Harinagar Char Rasta,
Gotri Road, Vadodara.
For and on behalf of
Mr. Memon Mohmmad Sajid Sikandarbhai
Proprietor
M/s. MUCH MORE
Juma Masjid Building,
Gendigate Road, Near Mandvi,
Vadodara.
...Respondent
(Orig. Complainant)
Appearance: Ms. Palak Thakkar, Ld. Advocate for the appellants
Coram: (Shri S. N. Vakil, Judicial Member)
(Shri J.Y. Shukla, Member)
Order by Shri S.N. Vakil, Judicial Member
1. This Appeal is by the opponent of the complaint.
2. The
Respondent-
Complainant
Mr.
Memon
Mohammad
Sajid
Sikandarbhai filed Consumer Complaint being CC No. 929 of 2009 with
CDRF, Vadodara, against the United India Insurance Co. the Opponent
alleging
that
he
took
shopkeepers
Insurance
Policy
bearing
No.180400/48/08/34/00005629 for the opponent of Rs.8,50,000/- for
the period from 20.02.2009 to 19.02.2010. Fire took place in his shop on
11.05.2009, for which they gave complaint on 12.05.2009 at Wadi Police
Station and informed the Insurance Company. It appointed surveyor
U.S.Murthy, who visited on 12.05.2009, asked for further documents. On
18.05.2009 assessed the loss at Rs.4,77,000/- as against the total claim
of Rs.8,34,000/-. The opponent sent the check of Rs.4,77,000/- which
the complainant accepted but immediately lodged protest on 23.07.2009,
ask for the basis of such deduction and copy of the survey report, none of
which was given. For this anyfair practice and deficiency in service, he
claims remaining Rs.3,57,643/- with 9% interest from 21.07.2009,
Rs.10,000/- towards mental pain and agony and Rs.5,000/- towards
costs.
3. The Appellant – Opponent vide written version denied all the allegations.
The complainant after accepting the cheque cannot file complaint and
was not the consumer. There is no deficiency.
4. The CDRF, Vadodara(Addl) by its order dated 09.07.2015 partly allowed
the claim to the extent of 1,37,000/- with 9% interest from 21.07.2009,
3,000/- towards mental pain and Rs.5,000/- towards costs. It is on the
ground that the surveyor has deducted Rs. 15,000/- depreciation on
furniture fixtures and fittings at 30% within just two years. He has
assessed damage of T-shirts and Shirts at 50% but actual stock was
totally burnt and damaged and after cleaning the sale price of T-Shirts
and Shirts cannot gain; racks and glasses were assessed at Rs. 10,000/-
but they were totally damaged and cannot be repaired. The surveyor
deducted 5% for error and 20% of not found in insured submitted
purchase and also deducted 10% of one year old purchase bill which may
be out of style and whereby the dead stock only. He has deducted salvage
amount of Rs. 30,943/- but he has not given any explanation or base.
The Forum reassessed the loss of Rs. 8,04,933/- deducted Rs.
1,60,986/- from 5% of purchase bills and 15% difference of physical
verification, Salvage at Rs. 20,000/-, less as per policy condition
Rs.10,000/-, total deduction Rs. 6,13,947/- finding the amount of Rs.
1,36,947/- i.e. 1,37,000/- as payable.
5. The Insurance Company being aggrieved by the same has preferred this
appeal on the ground that the claim was settled as full and final and
therefore after the discharge order complaint is not maintainable. It erred
in appreciating the survey report in its true spirit which was prepared
after verifying necessary documents. There was nothing produced by the
