LAWS(NCD)-2006-2-107

SATAYANARAYAN JIWANRAM Vs. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD

Decided On February 06, 2006
SATAYANARAYAN JIWANRAM Appellant
V/S
NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Original Petition is filed by M/s. Satayanarayan Jiwanram, a partnership firm, having its godown premises at Police Bazar, Shillong, Meghalaya, against M/s. National Insurance Co. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Insurance Company) for unjustifiably repudiating the claim arising due to the damage by fire and water. The complainant has claimed a sum of Rs. 20 lakhs for the loss suffered by it with interest at the rate of 24% p.a. and Rs. 5 lakhs as damages with costs of Rs. 50,000. Facts :

(2.) It is the say of the complainant that in May 1996, an agent of the Insurance Company approached the complainant and consequent thereupon the complainant took two policies of 'Fire Policy C' bearing Nos. 201000/11/97/31/04848 and 201000/11/97/31/04849 for a sum of Rs. 10 lakhs each for the period between 9.5.1996 and 8.5.1997 covering its godown located at Police Bazar, Shillong, Meghalaya and paid a premium of Rs. 2,205 for each policy. The aforesaid policies being were renewed from time to time. The godowns were used for storing clothings and other fabrics. The premium for relevant period commencing from 12.5.1997 to 11.5.1998 was paid on 13.5.1997.

(3.) On 20.9.1997, at about 10 a.m., there was a devastating fire in the godown and goods worth more than Rs. 20 lakhs were destroyed in the said fire. The complainant intimated to the opposite party, Insurance Company about the mishap and thereafter approached it to reimburse for its losses. For this purpose, the complainant has submitted duly completed claim forms, a detailed list of stocks damaged by fire, smoke and water and a list of sound stocks, income tax and sales tax returns for the past three years, books of accounts, police and fire brigade reports, local newspaper cuttings, Bazar Committee Report regarding the incident and history of previous fire loss claims. Thereafter, the complainant supplied other documents which were required by the Surveyor.