JAYASHREE ROY CHOWDHURY Vs. ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This suit was instituted by Smt. Jayashree Roy Choudhury the sole proprietor of the business under the name of Industrial Distributors against the Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., for realisation of a sum of Rs. 66,500.00 on account of compensation for the loss of 190 gas cylinders, which according to the plaintiff were lost due to risks covered under the Burglary Insurance Policy bearing No. 3130/22/C/Misc./760/DP/79 dated 6/07/1979. The said insurance policy was originally for the period from 7/07/1979 to 7/07/1980 (4 PM)M). By and under a special endorsement dated 7/07/1980, the said policy was renewed for a further period of 12 months from 7/07/1980 to 7/07/1981 (4 PM)M).

(2.) According to the plaintiff on the night of February 17-18, 1981, at about 2 AM, a burglary took place at the godown of the plaintiff at No. 99C, Kankulia Road, Calcutta, where the insured goods were kept by the plaintiff. By reason of the said burglary, according to the plaintiff, 190 gas cylinders stored at the said godown were taken away by the burglers and were lost to the plaintiff. The plaintiff claims the value of the said 190 gas cylinders which according to the plaintiff, was Rs. 350.00 for each gas cylinder. The plaintiff was also claims in this suit interest at the rate of 18% per annum from 1/07/1983 until the date of the institution of the suit as also interim and further interest and costs.

(3.) In the written statement the defendant does not admit that the plaintiff had any insurable interest in the goods lost. The defendant also denied that the loss, if any, was covered by the insurance policy. The defendant also disputes the quantum of loss as alleged to have been suffered by the plaintiff. The further case of the defendant is that the contract of insurance became void by reason of omission of material fact from the proposal form. According to the defendant, the defendant in course of the enquiry by the Surveyor of the defendant and by the report of the surveyor, came to know that there were earlier instances of burglary in the godown in question and according to the defendant, the said facts with regard to the earlier burglaries which took place prior to 7/07/1979 were not mentioned in and/or were omitted to be mentioned in the proposal form and as a result thereof, the contract of insurance became void.