LAWS(WBCDRC)-2012-6-1

RATNA SAHA Vs. ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED

Decided On June 19, 2012
Ratna Saha Appellant
V/S
ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present Appeal has been directed against the judgment and order dateed 9.6.2010 passed by the Hooghly District Consumer Forum in C.D.F. Case No. 2 of 2009 wherein the learned District Forum dismissed the petition of complaint on contest without any order as to cost.

(2.) THE case of the Complainants/Appellants before the learned District Forum, in brief, was that the complainants, who own and run a foreign liquor shop, obtained insurance coverage in respect of the liquor shop, the Insurance Company after observing all the formalities. According to the complainants, during subsistence of the insurance coverage, the area wherein the shop and godown of the complainants is situated was afflicted with severe flood thereby causing total damage of the stock kept in the ground floor godown of the shop. The matter was duly informed to the Insurance Company and at the instance of the Insurance Company there was a joint inspection of the shop in question of the complainants and on instruction of the OP/Insurance Company the damaged/broken bottles of the foreign liquor were removed after due physical verification thereof. The complainants in due course of time preferred an insurance claim before the OP/Insurance Company, but the Insurance Co. for reasons best known to it has repudiated the claim of the complainants with the observation that the claim case was closed and, hence, the petition of complaint for reliefs to the tune of Rs. 10,08,638 towards damage of foreign liquor, Rs. 1,00,000 for mental pain and agony and Rs. 50,000 for deficiency in service and Rs. 15,000 for litigation cost.

(3.) THE OP/Insurance Company contested the case by filing a written version thereby denying all the material averments mentioned in the petition of complaint contending inter alia that in the present case the complainants obtained Shopkeeper Policy and the complainants having utterly failed to substantiate their case, as made out in the petition of complaint, inasmuch as in the absence of any insurance coverage for the godown in question situated at the ground floor and that separate register having been maintained in respect of the godown situated at the ground floor, the complainants were not entitled to the reliefs and, accordingly, prayed for dismissal of the petition of complaint.