UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO LTD Vs. ANDREW VIVERA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellants are the defendants in O.S.217 of 1983 of the Additional Sub-Court, Cochin. Respondent (plaintiff) filed the suit to recover a sum of Rs. 54,334/- being the amount due to him on account of damages caused to his fishing boat which was covered by an insurance policy. The learned Additional Sub Judge decreed the suit for the amount claimed with interest at 6% per annum from the date of suit till realisation and proportionate costs. .

(2.) Plaintiff owned a fishing boat which was insured with the defendants. It is the case of the plaintiff that apart from the policy of insurance he had taken monsoon coverage in respect of the boat for one month. It is further stated that the boat was in good condition, that on 13-6-1981 the boat sailed from Cochin with the members of the crew, and that on 15-6-1981 plaintiff came to know that the boat which was drifted away by violent waves met with accident. Plaintiff sent notice claiming an amount of Rs. 69,735/- as damages from the defendants. The surveyor who con ducted the survey had auctioned the engine of the boat and it was purchased by the plaintiff for a sum of Rs. 15,401/-. Plaintiff claims the balance amount in the suit. Defendants filed written statement contending inter alia that there was no policy for the monsoon coverage and hence they are not liable to pay any amount to the plaintiff.

(3.) The boat was insured against the total loss, salvage charges etc. The insurance policy has been marked as Ext. B-1. The laid up warrant clause states that the boat will have to be laid up from 1-6-1981 to 15-8-1981. Plaintiff says that he took up monsoon coverage for one month with effect from 12-6-1981 through Mr. Charles, the Development Officer. Plaintiff relies on Ext.A-5 to substantiate his contention that he had paid the amount to the Insurance Company for the monsoon coverage. Plaintiff contends that Charles came to his house on 12-6-1981 and apprised him of the desirability of having monsoon coverage, that he agreed to take monsoon coverage and that- Rs. 150/- was paid as premium. Ext.A-5 is the receipt obtained by the plaintiff. This is dated 13-6-1981. Defendants denied Ext.A-5 and wanted that they should be absolved from any liability of paying the amount to the plaintiff.