NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. THROUGH ITS DELHI REGIONAL OFFICE AT NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., LEGAL VERTICAL 2E/9, JHANDEWALAN EXT. NEW DELHI Vs. M/S. SAVITRI RICE MILL THROUGH ITS PARTNER, SANTOSH KUMAR AGRAWAL, S/O GANDHI GANJ RAIGARH, DISTRICT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The complainant/respondent obtained an insurance policy in respect of a transformer installed in its rice mills. The said transformer had been manufactured by Rajasthan Transformer & Electric Corporation and was insured for a sum of Rs.5,53,000.00. The said transformer got burnt due to short-circuiting, on 12.1.2012. A claim was lodged by the respondent/complainant with the petitioner company and one Mr. Sanjeev Saxena was appointed as a surveyor to assess the loss to the complainant. The transformer was already 19 years old at the time it got burnt, it having been manufactured in the year 1993. Initially the surveyor assessed the loss before deduction of excess amount, at Rs.2,02,900.00 but later on, he corrected the aforesaid amount to Rs.1,12,840.00. The higher amount had been given on account of a clerical error while calculating the depreciation amount. When right depreciation amount for 19 years was deducted, the resultant amount came to Rs.1,12,840.00. The insurer, however, did not make any payment to the complainant and took the stand that as per the insurance policy the excess amount itself was Rs.1,10,600.00 which was liable to be deducted from the assessment made by the surveyor. Being aggrieved, the complainant/respondent approached the concerned District Forum by way of a consumer complaint.

(2.) The complaint was resisted by the insurer primarily on the ground that the loss to the complainant had rightly been computed by the surveyor and the excess amount of Rs.1,10,600.00 was required to be deducted from the assessment made by the surveyor.

(3.) The District Forum vide its order dated 5.12.2012 directed the insurer to pay the entire sum insured to the complainant. Being aggrieved from the order passed by the District Forum, the insurer approached the concerned State Commission by way of an appeal. The said appeal having been dismissed by the State Commission vide impugned order dated 5.12.2015, the insurer is before this Commission by way of this revision petition.