NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD Vs. SANJEEV ROHILLA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner was the opposite party before the District Forum where the respondent/complainant had filed a complaint alleging deficiency in service on the part of the petitioner.

(2.) VERY briefly stated the facts of the case are that the respondent is running an industry in the name of Rohilla Carpet at Panipat. He had obtained insurance for Rs. 12 lakh from the petitioner Insurance Company. During the life of the policy, there was theft of carpets. The incidence was reported to the Police as also the petitioner, who appointed a Surveryor, who assessed the loss at Rs. 63,364. This amount was paid to the respondent/complainant on 10.10.2002. Not satisfied with this compensation for loss, the respondent/complainant filed a complaint before the District Forum, who in order to satisfy themselves, about the capacity of the godowns to store the carpets in the respondent's premises, appointed a Local Commissioner,whose report is on record and according to this report, as per dimensions of the two godowns, it could easily accommodate 1,320 pieces of carpets. Based on the material on record and the report of the Local Commissioner, the District Forum assessed the loss at Rs. 8,10,000 and directed the petitioner to pay Rs. 7,46,655 to the petitioner being the difference between the loss assessed by the District Forum and amount already paid by the petitioner to the respondent/complainant, along with interest @ 8% p.a. from the date of Surveyor report till the date of realisation. Aggrieved by this order, the petitioner filed an appeal before the State Commission, which was dismissed. Hence, this revision petition before us.

(3.) WE heard the learned Counsel for the parties and perused the material on record.