STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

U.T., CHANDIGARH

M/s Indian Agro Foods through its Partner Mr.Anand Angira Chhabra son of Sh.Ashok Kumar Chhabra, Village and Post Office Natwal, Chajjumajra, Mouli Road, Tehsil Barwala, District Panchkula, Haryana.

……Complainant

V e r s u s

1. National Insurance Company Ltd., through its Chairman cum Managing Director Smt.Tejinder Mukherjee, Branch Office at SCO No.305-306, Sector 35-B, Chandigarh.
2. National Insurance Company Ltd., through its Chairman cum Managing Director Smt.Tejinder Mukherjee, Regd. Office 3, Middleton Street, Prafulla Chandra Sen Sarani, Kolkata, West Bengal 700071.

                                                             .... Opposite Parties

BEFORE:         JUSTICE RAJ SHEKHAR ATTRI, PRESIDENT

                        MRS. PADMA PANDEY, MEMBER

                        MR. RAJESH K. ARYA, MEMBER

Argued by:      

Sh.Pradeep Sharma, Advocate for the complainant.

None for the Opposite Parties.

PER PADMA PANDEY, MEMBER

                The facts, in brief, are that the complainant firm is engaged in the business of poultry farming. In the year 2018, the complainant firm took policy i.e. Standard Fire and Special Perils Policy bearing No.420101111810000147 valid from 27.05.2018 to 26.05.2019 from Opposite Party No.1 having sum insured of Rs.8,70,00,000/- at the premium of Rs.58,516/-, in which, description of property covered as “poultry farms (excluding birds therein), hatchery, section IV-industrial manufacturing risk”. It was further stated that the complainant paid additional premium of Rs.1028/- and got an add on coverage of “Earthquake”. During the policy period, on 09.02.2019, the insured building, in question, was damaged due to earthquake and accumulation of water due to heavy rainfall. The said fact was reported to the insurance company on the same day i.e. 09.02.2019, who appointed M/s Consolidated India Surveyors as a surveyor for assessment of the loss. It was further stated  that no other terms and conditions were supplied to the complainant. The insurance claim of the complainant was repudiated by the Opposite Parties by citing reason that the case falls under the Exclusions of Peril-Subsidence and Landslide. The complainant procured the copy of terms and conditions from the office of the insurance company and found that the Opposite Parties have some other terms and conditions which are different from those mentioned online. It was further stated that “Flood and Inundations” and “Earthquake”, was certified by the Tehsildar of the area vide certificate dated 21.02.2019. It was further stated that in order to make the case non payable on the ground of exclusions and peril “subsidence and landslide”, the Opposite Parties through their surveyor sought report from M/s Continental Foundations & Labs. The said Engineering firm in its report stating that they were contacted by Mr.Joshi on behalf of the insurance company intimating the loss and mentioned therein that the said Engineering Firm was asked to visit the site alongwith team members of insurance company to find out the reasons of collapse. Accordingly, site was visited by the relevant members on 12.02.2019. The said Engineer inspected the site on behalf of M/s Continental Foundation. The said Surveyor M/s Consolidated Insurance Surveyor and Loss Assessors Private Limited submitted his report on 25.06.2019, in which, it has been specifically mentioned that there was no storm and landslide and subsidence also could not be noted at the site of loss. It was further mentioned that the said loss might have been caused due to structural failure or poor quality of construction material used for construction of the building. It was further stated that Naib Tehsildar, Barwala has certified that the building premises of the complainant’s feed mill has been collapsed due to