SUJATA CHEMICALS Vs. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -The appellant feeling aggrieved by the order dated 28.10.1996 dismissing the complaint relating to insurance claim passed by the State Commission, Ahmedabad, has filed the present appeal.

(2.) Facts giving an occasion to the appellant to file this appeal are as under: The appellant was a registered partnership firm and is engaged in manufacturing acids and also involved in processing and distillation and sale of chemicals at its factory at Vadodara for the last more than 30 years. The appellant had taken Machinery Breakdown Insurance Policy from the respondent for the period from May 10, 1994 to May 9, 1995 in regard to 1500 litres glass linked reactor for a sum of Rs. 4,50,000, for installation in the factory. Pre-insurance survey of the reactor was done by the surveyor of the respondent. After obtaining the insurance policy, the reactor was put to use and it was functional till August 25, 1994. The insurance policy was issued for a total sum of Rs. 4,69,272.40 which covered the value of the glass parts. However, at about 3 p.m. on 25.8.1994, it was noticed that it had developed holes. The appellant accordingly informed the appellant about damage to the reactor on 26.8.1994. The respondent appointed a surveyor. The appellant supplied whatever information was demanded by the surveyor. The respondent repudiated the claims vide letter dated 27.4.1995 on the ground that damage to heat resisting and anti-corrosive lining and cracking of glass lining were excluded. The reactor contained 80% glass parts and if glass parts were excluded, it would have been meaningless to have insurance. In the aforesaid circumstances, the complainant filed the claim for Rs. 6,00,000 as compensation and costs.

(3.) The respondent resisted the claim by asserting that the repudiation of the claim vide letter issued on 27.4.1995 was fully justified and there was no deficiency in service. Since the complaint has not been filed within three calendar months from the date of repudiation, the complaint was not maintainable under Clause 12 of the policy for the complaint was not filed on 24.1.1996.