LAWS(HPH)-2010-4-55

NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. Vs. ARUN CHANDER SOOD

Decided On April 06, 2010
NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. Appellant
V/S
Arun Chander Sood Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal by National Insurance Company, who was one of the defendant in the Civil Suit, is directed against the judgment dated 2.1.1997 of the learned District Judge (First Appellate Court), whereby appeal filed by the appellant-defendant against the decree dated 31.8.1988 of trial Court i.e. Sub Judge Ist Class, Rohru has been dismissed and the decree for a sum of Rs. 85,000/- passed against the appellant-defendant, has been upheld.

(2.) Facts that need to be noticed for the disposal of the appeal may be summed up thus.

(3.) Respondent Arun Chander Sood (hereinafter called 'plaintiff') runs a business in the name and style of M/S Arun Traders in main bazaar, Rohru. He had some cash credit arrangement with United Commercial Bank, also a respondent herein. On account of the said arrangement, plaintiff Arun Traders had hypothecated his stock-in-trade with the said bank and, therefore, the bank used to get the stock-in-trade insured on year to year basis. In the year 1981-82, the stock-in-trade was insured with New India Insurance Company, for a sum of Rs. 50,000/- and a premium of Rs. 78/- had been paid. The policy expired on 18.5.1982. Thereafter, insurance was got done by the bank with the present appellant. The stock-in-trade was insured for Rs. 85000/- and a premium of Rs. 131/- was paid to defendant No. 4 Shri Mohan Lal Chauhan, Inspector of the appellantdefendant. The aforesaid amount of Rs. 131/- was paid to said defendant No. 4 along with the premium for insurance of goods of several other customers of the bank against a consolidated receipt Ext.P29. Respondent No. 4 Mohan Lal Chauhan assured that policy/cover note would be sent to the bank later on. This transaction took place on 3.6.1982. On 14.6.1982, a fire broke out in Rohru Bazar. Shop of the plaintiff was completely gutted in that fire. He preferred insurance claim. That was dismissed by the defendant on the ground that his shop or the stock-in-trade had not been insured with it.