UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. KHADI UDHYOG

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This First Appeal under Sec. 51 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (in short, the 'Act') is in challenge to the order dtd. 21/12/2021 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Haryana, Panchkula (in short, the 'State Commission') in Complaint Case No. 638 of 2018 allowing the complaint.

(2.) The delay of 67 days in the filing of this complaint is condoned for the reasons stated in the application for the condonation of delay in the interest of justice.

(3.) Briefly put, the relevant facts of the case are that the Respondent/ Complainant had availed a Standard Fire and Special Perils Policy (the 'Policy') covering the risk for machinery, stocks and building from the appellant insurance company for the period 23/12/2015 to 22/12/2016. In the intervening night of 29/30/4.2016 a fire broke out in the insured premises allegedly due to a spark from the generator. The Fire Brigade was informed and the fire was controlled after considerable effort. The Appellant/Insurance Company was intimated about the incident on 30/4/2016. The Appellant appointed Royal Associates, Investigating and Detective Agency to investigate the alleged incident of fire and cause of fire. On the basis of evidence gathered, vide report dtd. 2/8/2016, the investigator opined that the Respondents did not store large quantities of goods in the insured godown since the cotton purchased was distributed to workers in villages to convert it into cotton yarn and cotton to prepare products such as daris (rugs) and shawls which were thereafter sent to showrooms. Hence the question of goods being kept in the godowns did not arise and during the night the godown was kept closed with no guard present. The cause of the fire which was noticed at around 9:00 AM on 30/4/2016 was not known. According to the investigator, there was no electricity connection in the godown and the DG set was also not working on 29/4/2016 on account of it being a holiday. It is also stated that intimation of fire to the fire station was delayed since it was recorded at 11.10 AM. According to the report of the investigator, although the insured had claimed that cotton yarn had got burned in the fire, according to the workers only waste cotton had been destroyed. In view of the contradictory statements, the investigator in his report dtd. 2/8/2016 stated that it appeared that the loss in the fire was only of waste cotton in small quantity.