NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD Vs. ARUN TIWARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE complainant/respondent no. 1, who was carrying business under the name and style of Mani Ratnam Exports and was engaged in exporting semi -precious stones, obtained a marine policy from the appellant company on 26.12.2000 for a sum of Rs.23 lakhs. The complainant then exported semi stones valued at US$44700 (equivalent to Rs.23 lakhs) to USA through its banker, Bank of America, which was also the consignee of the goods as per the Airway bill. The goods were meant for an over -seas buyer M/s. Amma Inc of USA and were sent by parcel post on 26.012.2000. The goods, however, did not reach the destination. The postal department issued a certificate dated 13.05.2002, admitting the non -delivery of the goods in question and also paid a sum of Rs.3115/ - to the complainant as per its rules. Since the goods in question had been insured under the policy taken from the appellant company, a claim of Rs.20,84,267/ - was lodged by the complainant with the said company.

(2.) ON receipt of the complaint, initially the insurance company appointed M/s. Goyal Rajesh and Company, surveyor and loss assessor, who submitted a financial investigation report dated 25.11.2002 after visiting the office of the complainant, making necessary inquiries and inspecting his books of account etc. Thereafter, the Insurance company appointed M/s. K.D. Kohli and Company Private Limited on 31.05.2004. M/s. K.D. Kohli and Company submitted its report dated 10.08.2004 which was styled 'technical opinion' in respect of the claim lodged by the complainant. The aforesaid firm reported that the consignee not having received consignment, informed about it, within one month, but despite that the complainant did not immediately intimate the loss of the goods either to the postal authorities or to the insurance company. It was further reported that the insured had not explained as to why despite having received information form the consignee about non -delivery, they did not lodge a claim with the postal authorities immediately and lodged after 5 months with Postal Department and with the insurance company about 9 months. Alleging violation of norms and policy conditions, the aforesaid company reported that had the insured complied with the said requirement recovery or non -recovery from the defaulting carrier would have been entirely a risk and responsibility of the insurers.

(3.) BASED upon the aforesaid report, the claim was repudiated by the Insurance Company vide its letter dated 26.10.2014 which to the extent relevant, reads as under: -