LAWS(BOM)-1994-1-9

DAWOOD UMAR TAJ Vs. ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED

Decided On January 17, 1994
DAWOOD UMAR TAJ Appellant
V/S
ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since the subject matter in the aforesaid 81 complaints is identical, this common order is passed while deciding all these complaints.

(2.) It is worthwhile to mention the background which has given rise to these complaints. The complainants are mainly engaged in the business of purchase and sale of dry fish in Raigad District in general and in Mahad Taluka in Raigad District in particular. In order to carry out the business, the complainants initially and individually purchase the dry fish from Fishermen and store them in their godowns for the purpose of its sale in the respective villages. The complainants have godowns situated at their respective places mentioned in detail in their complaints. In order to carry on the business of dry fish, the complainants needed the financial assistance. The opposite party No. 2, the Mahad Co. Op. Bank Ltd. Mahad has been providing financial assistance to the complainants to carry out their business. While providing financial assistance, the opposite party No. 2 used to provide loan against stocks of dry fish stored in the individual godowns of the complainants against hypothecation of the dry fish stock. The complainants used to repay the loan amounts with interest to the aforesaid Bank, after the sale of their dry fish. This Scheme of advancing loan by the aforesaid Bank to the persons engaged in the dry fish business has been going on in Mahad, District Raigad since long. Every year, fresh loan used to be granted to the complainants against their stock of dry fish, consequent on the hypothecation of the stock. The opposie party No. 2, the Bank while advancing loan to the complainants, invariably used to insist on the complainants to get their stocks, insured by the opposite party No. 1, the Oriental Insurance Co. with a view to securing the repayment of the loans. The opposite party No. 2 used to directly negotiate with Insurance Company for purposes of obtaining their Insurance Policy with a view to obtaining the required Insurance Cover in case of likely loss of the stock. The premium amounts towards the Insurance Policy were to be paid directly to the opposite party No. 2 and the amounts so paid used to be discounted from each complainants account. The opposite party No. 1 used to directly send the Insurance Policies to the opposite party No. 2 Bank for their record. The opposite party No. 2, invariably used to render necessary service of paying the premium amounts and obtaining the required Insurance Policy from opposite party No. 1 in the case of each complainant with a view to indemnify the loss of stock of dry fish. This arrangement continued for a number of years.

(3.) The complainants alleged that in the rainy season of 1989, there were heavy rains accompanied by cyclone in Mahad Taluka and all over Raigad District. The complainants godowns were heavily damaged due to the cyclone and the dry fish, was damaged due to rains. The result of the excessive rains was that the dry fish stored in each complainants godown started stinking. It was likely to give rise to epidemics as the stinking fish was unfit for human consumption. It is the case of the complainants that the local authorities, in order to prevent the disease and unhygenic conditions in villages, decided to dispose of the said stocks of dry fish. The Revenue Authorities conducted the panchanamas of the stocks in the case of each complainant in the presence of panchas. Thereafter with the directions of the Revenue Authority and the local bodies, the dry fish was removed by trucks and was dumped in the river, on 20th July, 1989. The disposal of the damaged dry fish stock was ordered by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate of Mahad and the Tahasildar with a view to removing the nuisance and avoiding unhygenic conditions prevailing in that area. According to complainants, the disposal of the damaged dry fish stock with its values concerning each complainant has been recorded in the panchanamas by the Public authorities. The complainants further alleged that unprecedented rains in the month of July, 29th 1989 was widely published in the press.