RAJENDRA PLASTICS Vs. NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Complainant, M/s. Rajendra Plastics, Bombay has filed this complaint against the opposite party, the New India Assurance Company alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that the complainant is engaged in the business of purchase and sale of all kind of plastic raw material and plastic goods. To protect their interest they had taken a Fire Policy 'C' from the OP amounting to Rs. 35 lakhs effective 30.10.90 to 29.10.91. The fire policy covered the following five godowns:

(3.) There was a fire incident on 6.12.1990 in the Godown No. 4 M/s. Paras Warehousing Corporation in Bhiwandi where the goods of the complainant was stored which were completely destroyed. The intimation of this was given to the complainant claiming a loss of Rs. 28 lakhs. It is the case of the complainant that they had sent a letter to the OP dated 7.11.1990 which was delivered in their office on the subject of cancellation of other godowns and requesting the OP to limit the liability of insurance to one godown belonging to M/s. Paras Warehousing Corporation. When upon filing the fire claim, referred to above was not getting settled after correspondence matter was taken up with the higher authorities and finally vide their letter dated 30.8.1993 the OP repudiated the claim which reads as follows: Re: Fire Claim No.11/110400/90/0016 Policy No.11/110400/05288 We refer to the claim form dated 15.12.1990 submitted by you in respect of damage to your goods by fire on 6.12.1990, whilst lying in one of the five godowns covered under the above mentioned policy. Since occurrence of the fire on 6.12.1990 in the godown of M/s. Paras Warehousing Corporation. You have been continuously insisting upon our deleting the remaining godowns. You have alleged on several occasions that you informed us to delete remaining godowns vide your letter dated 7.11.1990. We have confirmed every time that we have not received the alleged letter dated 7.11.1990 and, therefore, the question of deleting the remaining godowns from the above policy does not arise at all. Your continuous insistence on deleting the remaining godowns by falsely alleging that the letter dated 7.11.1990 is sent to the company is a clear and deliberate attempt on your part to claim more amount from the Insurance Company than what you had, in fact, lost. In view of this, we hereby reject your claim in toto in terms of condition No.8 of the above insurance policy. The condition No. 8 reads us under: