LAWS(NCD)-2015-4-81

NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD Vs. MITTAL ENTERPRISES

Decided On April 21, 2015
NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD Appellant
V/S
Mittal Enterprises Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE complainant, Sita Ram Mittal, who is carrying business under the name and style of Mittal Enterprises, had taken cash credit limit at Rs.6,00,000/ - from UCO bank which was later enhanced to Rs.25,00,000/ - in the year 2005 -06. According to the complainant, at the aforesaid time, his stock was kept in a godown at Village Bibiwala as well as in his shop at Court Road, Bhatinda. This is also the case of the complainant that UCO bank used to purchase insurance policies, one in respect of stock lying in the godown and the other in respect of the stock lying in the shop. This is also his case that vide letter dated 07 -01 -2008 he had informed the insurance company that the entire stock kept in the godown had been shifted to the shop, but despite that, the policy was obtained in respect of godown at Bibiwala, which had no stock. No policy was taken by the bank for the year 2009 -10 in respect of the stock which had been kept in the shop.

(2.) IN the night intervening 17/18 -01 -2010 a fire broke out in the shop of the complainant. Intimation having been given to the insurance company, Mr. Pramod Mittal was appointed as a surveyor but the survey was refused on the ground that the stock kept in the shop was not insured with the insurance company, the policy in respect of the shop having not got renewed after 25 -04 -2009. According to the complainant stock worth Rs.27,35,881/ - got burnt in the fire which broke out in his shop and all the purchase bills and books were also destroyed.

(3.) TWO complaints were filed before the District Forum, one against UCO Bank claiming an amount of Rs.9,23,000/ -, that being the value for which the stock kept in the shop of the complainant was got insured for the year 2008 -09 but was not got insured for 2009 -10 and the other against both, the UCO Bank as well as the National Insurance Co. Ltd. seeking payment of Rs.17,85,000/ -, that being the sum assured in respect of the stock which used to be kept in the godown of the complainant, but was later shifted to his shop.