SHIV-VANI OIL & GAS EXPLORATION SERVICES LTD Vs. CHAIRMAN & MANAGING DIRECTOR UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner Company took a Marine Hull Comprehensive Package Policy dated 10.04.2003 from the opposite parties, United India Insurance Co. Ltd. in respect of coverage of 32 small Rigs in operations at Namsai in Arunachal Pradesh for the period from 10.04.2003 to 09.04.2004, for a total sum of Rs. 4.33 crores. The complainant also took an all risks policy dated 22.03.2003 for coverage of the Seismic units with accessories, for the period from 22.03.2003 to 21.03.2004, for Rs. 5 Crores. The case of the complainant Company is that on 21.11.2003 about 15 cadres of ADF/Ulfa armed with weapons entered into the operation areas, threatened to kill the staff working there and damaged several costly equipments, besides taking away some equipments and accessories of seismic survey. The complainant Company claims to have suffered a loss of Rs. 12,00,792/- in the aforesaid incident which was reported to the police and registered vide case no. 79/2003. In another similar incident on 23.11.2003, around 30/35 cadres of terrorists outfit attacked another Seismic area, threatened to kill the staff and took away several equipments and accessories from the area of operation. The complainant Company claims to have suffered a loss of Rs. 1,32,91,174/- in the second incident which was duly reported to the police and registered vide case no. 80/2003. On intimation being given to the Insurance Company, a surveyor was appointed. The said surveyor vide his first report dated 27.05.2006, pertaining to the incident of 21.11.2003 computed the loss at Rs. 71,12,592/- after depreciation. In the second report, which is dated 01.06.2006, and pertained to the incident of 21.11.2003, the surveyor recommended payment of Rs. 3,39,506/-. He thereafter deducted excess amount of Rs. 2.5 lakhs and recommended payment of claim to the extent of Rs. 68,62,592/-. However, even the aforesaid amount was not paid to the complainant which led to filing of this complaint seeking the following reliefs:-

(2.) The Insurance Company filed written version in which the incidents claimed by the complainant Company were not denied. It was stated in the reply that pursuant to the reports of the surveyor dated 27.05.2006 and 01.06.2006, they offered a sum of Rs. 68,28,415/- to the complainant in full and final settlement of its claim and that amount had already been paid to the complainant during pendency of this complaint. It would be pertinent to note here that in terms of the order of this Commission dated 16.05.2008, the Insurance Company paid the aforesaid sum of Rs. 68,28,415/- to the complainant.

(3.) A perusal of the report of the surveyor dated 27.05.2006 in respect of the terrorists attack on 23.11.2003 would show that though the complainants had claimed loss of Rs. 1,32,91,174/-, it had accepted the said claim at Rs. 1,21,61,086/-. The report further shows that though the complainant wanted depreciation to be applied at the rate of 4.75% per annum as per its fixed asset Register, the surveyor applied much higher depreciation. The report of the surveyor as regards application of the depreciation reads as under:-