MANISHA KRISHI BHANDAR Vs. ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed under Sec. 19 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 in challenge to the Order dtd. 4/12/2013 of the State Commission in complaint no. 40 of 2002, whereby the complaint of the complainant was partly allowed and the opposite party was directed to pay an amount of Rs.2,77,285.00 with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of offer i.e. 3/11/2001.

(2.) We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant ' complainant (hereinafter referred to as the 'complainant') and the learned counsel for the respondent (hereinafter referred to as the 'insurance company') and perused the record including the State Commission's impugned Order dtd. 4/12/2013 and the memorandum of appeal.

(3.) The brief facts of the case are that the complainant obtained two insurance policies from the insurance company, one policy titled as 'Fire Policy ' C' bearing no. 161900/2000/3545 for sum insured of Rs.3,34,000.00 in the name of A. B. Patil and Shri U. B. Patil with recorded address as Akkalkot, Dist. Solapur for a period from 26/11/1999 to 25/11/2000 and the another policy titled as 'Shopkeepers Insurance' policy bearing No. 161900/2000/3035 for a sum insured of Rs.10.00 lakh in the name of M/s Manisha Krishi Bhandar with recorded address as Opp. S. T. Stand, Akkalkot, Dist. Solapur for the period 8/1/2000 to 7/1/2001. On 10/9/2000, a fire took place in the premises where the goods were stored and the loss occurred to the complainant. The complainant informed the insurance company. The insurance company appointed a preliminary surveyor to conduct the survey. The survey was conducted and the preliminary surveyor submitted its report on 12/9/2000. The preliminary surveyor concluded that the policy no. 161900/2000/3545 covers stock (grains) where the fire took place. The final surveyor was appointed, who submitted its report on 12/4/2001 assessing the net loss at Rs.56,715.00. It is submitted that the said amount was deposited with the State Commission and later on withdrawn by the complainant under the orders of the State Commission. It is alleged that the complainant submitted the claim with the insurance company but the insurance company has neither repudiated nor allowed the claim.