NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD Vs. SKS LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These appeals arise from the two orders, both dated 5.12.2008, one passed in complaint case No. C-42/01 and the other in complaint case No. C-344/01. Complaints before the State Commission were filed by the complainant M/s. S K S Limited alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party-Insurance Company by making unlawful deductions from the insurance claim payable by the Insurance Company in respect of the damage suffered to insured hovercrafts, i.e. ACV Morning Glory and Marigold which met with an accident and suffered damage at their scheduled trip from Vashi to Gateway of India and vice-versa near Trombay. M/s. Rohit Kumar & Co. Approved Surveyors, Investigators, Valuers and Consulting Engineers were deputed to conduct survey who assessed the loss of ACV Morning Glory at Rs. 31,20,009.00. However, Insurance Company by deducting a sum of Rs. 9,30,349.00 paid a sum of Rs. 21,89,660.00 to the complainant. As against the assessed loss of Rs. 24,27,683.49 in respect of the other hovercraft Marigold, the Insurance Company deducted a larger sum and paid a sum of Rs. 12,07,374.00 only to the complainant. According to the complainant, deductions of the huge amounts made by the Insurance Company were totally unjustified as a result of which they have suffered loss and set back in business. Claims were accordingly made for payment of the balance amount and also compensation. The complaints were resisted by the Insurance Company thereby trying to justify the deductions under the relevant heads "Ground, etc. deduction Rs. 3,75,000 ( Incl. TL/CTL/P) and Rs. 7,50,000 towards hover deductible EL (Incl. TC/CLT/AT" and towards salvage. The State Commission going by the respective pleas and the terms and conditions of the insurance policy, however, partly allowed the complaints with identical order and granting same reliefs by observing as under:

(2.) Aggrieved by the said orders, National Insurance Company have filed appeal No. 291/2009 which seeks to challenge the order passed in complaint No. C-344/01 and appeal No. 292/2009 which seeks to challenge the order in complaint case No. C-42/2001.

(3.) We have heard Mr. R.C. Mishra, learned Counsel for the appellant-National Insurance Company and Mr. Rakesh Kapoor, learned Counsel representing the respondent and have given our thoughtful consideration to their respective submissions.