PATEL HOME FURNISHING Vs. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is complaint is filed under sec. 21 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (in short, the "Act") alleging deficiency in service in the repudiation of his claim under a Fire and Peril Insurance policy issued by the opposite party.

(2.) The facts of the case, in brief, as stated by the complainant are that the complainant is a proprietorship firm in the business of home furnishing which had obtained an insurance policy from opposite party no.1 covering stocks hypothecated with opposite party no.2. The complainant obtained a cash credit facility (CC-H) of Rs.60.00 lakhs against hypothecation of stocks with his residential flat as additional collateral security. As mandated by opposite party no. 2, Fire and Perils Insurance Policy No.246014111410000029 for hypothecated stock for Rs.24,99,500.00 and Policy No.246014111410000030 for Rs.1,25,00,000.00were taken effective from 4/8/2014 to 3/8/2015. Both the respective premiums of Rs.5351.00 and Rs.26,756.00 were debited from the CC-H account. The location of the hypothecated stocks was shifted from Shop No. A/4, Tapovan, Rani Sati Marg, Malad East, Mumbai 400097 and Shop No. 3A, Wing Maqbool Apartment, Rani Sati Marg, Malad East, Mumbai 400097 to a new location at 2/12, Nagshi K Charan Chawl, Rani Sati Marg, Shivaji Nagar, Pathanwadi, Malad East, Mumbai 400097 with due intimation to opposite party no.1 through opposite party no.2. On 6/3/2015 there was an accidental fire between 2am-3am in the godown premises Shop No. 2/12, Nagshi K Charan Chawl due to an electrical short circuit. The fire also damaged another adjacent godown of the complainant at Shop No.2, Nagshi K Charan Chawl, Rani Sati Marg, Shivaji Nagar, Pathanwadi, Malad East, Mumbai 400097 which was insured by SBI General Insurance Co. The fire was put out by the Fire Brigade. The entire hypothecated stock was burnt.

(3.) The opposite party no.2 was informed the next day by the complainant who communicated the fact to opposite party no. 1. Opposite party no. 3, M/s Cunningham Lindsey International, Insurance Surveyors and Loss Assessors Pvt. Ltd. (in short, "Surveyor") was appointed as surveyor by opposite party no.1. The site was inspected on 8/3/2015, 12/3/2015 and 14/3/2015 by the surveyor. Complainant submitted details of stock register, IT returns, sale purchase bills, invoices, fire brigade's repost, police panchnama, etc as asked for. According to the complainant, opposite party 1 delayed sharing details of endorsement of the policy to the new location, 2/12 Nagshi K Charan Chawl, to the surveyor. According to the complainant, shop nos.1- 2/12 measuring 400 sq. yds. and shop no.2 measuring 300 sq.yds., are adjacent and interconnected although shop no. 2 is not insured by opposite party no.1. It is stated by the complainant that shop no 2 is on the front side and shop no 2/12 is on the rear side. The complainant states that the surveyor concluded that the loss occurred in the front unit which was not insured since he considered the front unit to be Shop no. 2/12, Nagshi K Charan Chawl, Rani Sati Marg, Shivaji Nagar, Pathanwadi, Malad East, Mumbai 400097 and the rear unit to be Shop no 2, Khimsura Chawl, Shivaji Nagar, Pathanwadi, Quarry Road, Malad East, Mumbai 400097. Despite production of several documents, including the affidavit of the owner of the premises, the surveyor submitted his report dtd. 16/6/2015 concluding that the fire occurred in the rear unit. However, even after the report was prepared, the surveyor kept seeking details from the complainant since one email dtd. 26/6/2015 refers to documents being awaited from the complainant and another dtd. 1/7/2015 to his visit to the site to verify the electricity bill with neighbours.