SWASTIK POLYTEX PVT. LTD. Vs. ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE plaintiff has filed the present suit for recovery of Rs.1,24,11,770/ -. Issues were framed in this case on 09.10.2013. Issue No. 2, which is to be treated as a preliminary issue, reads as under: -

(2.) THE necessary facts to be noticed for disposal of issue No. 2 are that the plaintiff is a Company carrying on its business at Udaipur. The plaintiff Company had obtained a loan from State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur from Udaipur and the Bank had financed running the business of the plaintiff. The plaintiff got insured the factory building, plant machineries, electronic and other installations from the defendant for a sum of Rs.60 lakhs vide fire policy bearing No. 827/1999 for the period 08.11.1998 to 07.11.1999 and for raw material, finished goods, stock in process and packing material for a sum of Rs.15 lakhs for the period 30.01.1999 to 29.01.2000 vide policy No. 938/1999. A devastating fire took place in the factory of the plaintiff on 24.10.1999 in which almost the entire factory building, plant machineries, installations, raw material and finished goods were reduced to ashes resulting into heavy losses to the plaintiff. The matter was reported to the local Police on 20.10.1999. The extent of losses was informed by the plaintiff to the defendant on 26.10.1999. The insurance claim was lodged in the Branch Office of the defendant at Udaipur, which was eventually rejected by the defendant. Consequent thereto the present suit has been filed.

(3.) PER contra, learned counsel for the plaintiff has laboured hard to agitate that the letter of rejection is based on the opinion of the Surveyor who was appointed at New Delhi and the cancellation and the rejection of the claim is based on the opinion of the Head Office and also issued by the Head Office. Reliance is also placed on a letter dated 03.10.2000 addressed to the plaintiff which refers to the claim being put up to the Head Office. Reliance is also placed on a letter of 13.02.2000 to show that a Surveyor had been appointed in the matter from Delhi. Reliance is also placed on a communication of 18.09.2001 which refers to the fact that the competent authority has repudiated the claim, to show that the competent authority is situated at New Delhi. Reliance is also placed on the explanation to Section 20 of the Code of Civil Procedure to show that a Corporation shall be deemed to carry on business at its sole or principal office and the Head Office of the defendant being at Delhi, it is contended that this Court would have territorial jurisdiction in the matter.