NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD Vs. SPAN PACKAGING

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition under sec. 21 (B) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (in short, the 'Act') assails the order of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, UP, Lucknow (in short, 'State Commission') in Appeal No. 1512 of 2009 dtd. 29/5/2012 arising out of order dtd. 28/7/2009 of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Gautam Budh Nagar (in short, 'District Forum') in Complaint No. 59 of 2008.

(2.) Briefly stated, the facts of the case as stated by the petitioner, are that the respondent/complainant had taken a Standard Fire and Special Peril Policy from the petitioner for the period 4/3/2007 to 13/3/2008 covering goods kept in his premises at W-22, Sector 11, Noida for Rs.12,00,000.00. The policy was taken through respondent no. 2, Corporation Bank, with whom the goods were hypothecated. On the night of 26/27/3/2007 a fire broke out in the factory premises at D-62, Sector 7, Noida which was put out by the Fire Brigade and the Police Station, Sector 20, Noida was also informed. On 28/7/2007 the petitioner was intimated who deputed Piyush Associates, Surveyor and Loss Assessors to assess the loss to the said premises. The preliminary survey report mentioned that the policy in force was a renewed policy and that the address in both was shown as W-22, Sector 11, Noida. The risk covered was mentioned as manufacture of card board boxes including stock of corrugated boxes for Rs.12,00,000.00 and the assessment of loss indicated that no details of raw material were available and details in the bank statement did not tally with the audited balance sheet as on 31/3/2006. It was also reported that complete details of stock were not provided and the details provided when verified by an independent Chartered Accountant was valued at Rs.16.81 lakhs which was considered disproportionately high as stocks held by the respondent was approximately Rs.6.00 lakhs. The surveyor calculated the loss at Rs.6,00,709.00 and based upon the burnt paper collected on site, worked out the loss to be Rs.5,71,355.00. The net loss was worked out as Rs.5,60,674.00 on the basis of the higher amount after calculation of salvage value, under insurance for sub-standard claim and policy excess. The Surveyor's report noted that the insured had intimated the change in address on 7/3/2007 to his bankers (respondent no. 2) but no documentary evidence was provided for its receipt either by the bankers or the insurers (petitioner).

(3.) Respondent no. 1, vide letter dtd. 22/11/2007, informed the Divisional Manager, New India Assurance Co. Ltd that he had personally intimated the change in address through a letter dtd. 5/7/2007 and that respondent no. 2 (Bank) had informed the petitioner/insurance company vide letter dtd. 15/3/2007 about this. The petitioner deputed Madan Lal Sharma, Surveyor and Loss Assessor to investigate the change in address. Respondent no. 2 informed the petitioner that as it did not maintain any inward register, and as the letter was sent by hand, it was unable to confirm the date on which the letter conveying change in address was received from respondent no.1. The Surveyor, Madan Lal Sharma reported that no concrete evidence had been found in the records of the Bank/respondent no. 2 to substantiate respondent no. 1's claim of having conveyed the change in address to the petitioner. The claim was therefore repudiated on 30/1/2008 on the ground that neither the insured nor their bankers had conveyed the change in address. Consequently, all benefits under the policy stood forfeited and the claim was not payable on account of violation of the terms and conditions of the policy.