UMMADI SIMHACHALAM Vs. ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AGGRIEVED and dissatisfied by the judgment and order of the Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Hyderabad in Complaint No. 157 of 1993 Smt. Ummadi Simhachalam has filed this appeal before us. Case of the complainant:

(2.) THE complainant purchased a second hand fishing boat in 1983 for Rs. 1,40,000 got a registration Number VPT 519 for the said boat and operated the same from Visakhapatnam from 1983 to 1987. During 1989 the complainant effected major repairs like rebuilding the hull, fitting of new engine of Ashok Leyland make with finance from Andhra Bank. The Bank wrote to the Deputy Conservator, Visakhapatnam Port Trust requesting him to renew its licence and to make an endorsement on it mentioning the hypothecation to the Bank. M/s. Brahma Associates assessed the total value of the fishing vessel at Rs. 2,60,000 and M/s. Oriental Insurance Company insured the same for Rs. 2,50,000 on 19.12.1989 to 18.3.1990 which was further renewed on 16.3.1990. On 27.3.1990 when the said vessel was engaged in fishing operations near Bhyravapalem the boat overturned and sank into the sea. Another fishing vessel No. KKD 572 noticed the accident and rescued the crew of this vessel. On 28.3.1990 the owner came to know about the accident from the driver through a telegram. On30.5.1990 after getting the records, connected with the case, the complainant filed a claim with the Insurance Company along with the weather certificate issued by the department on 30.5.1990 and letter dated 15.11.1990 issued by the Mercantile Marine Department of the Ministry of Surface Transport. The Surveyor submitted the report on 27.9.1991 assessing the same as total loss. Finally on 3.7.1992 the complainant was informed that the Insurance Company has repudiated her claim on the grounds that the investigator appointed by the Insurance Company has reported that it is a false case Thereafter, the complainant filed a complaint before the State Commission claiming (a) Rs 2.5 lakhs with interest � 18% from the date of accident; (b) Rs. 10,000 towards search and salvage operation; (c) Rs. 1.00 lakh towards loss of business; and (d) Rs. 2.00 lakhs towards mental agony with costs.

(3.) THE State Commission relied upon the decision of the National Commission in N.C. Report in Parees Offset Pvt. Ltd. v. United India Insurance Co. Ltd., VPT 519, II (1995) CPJ 9 (NC), where it was held that on the facts and circumstances of the complaint, repudiation of the liability by the opposite party-Insurance Company cannot be said to have been made arbitrarily or unreasonably and there is absolutely no reason to hold that the decision was taken by the opposite party otherwise than in good faith and that, therefore, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. Accordingly the complainant is not entitled for any relief. Findings: