AVSR NAGAI MALIGAI & 2 ORS Vs. CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED & 3 ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed by the appellant AVSR Nagai Maligai & ors. against the order dated 27.3.2014 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, (in short 'the State Commission') passed in CC No.9 of 2007.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that the appellants/complainants are doing business in gold and silver jewellery in shop at Jayamondan and they had taken insurance policy as "Jeweller's Block Insurance Policy" from the respondents/opposite parties through the 4 respondents/opposite th party for the period between 14 December 2002 and 13 December 2003 for the value of th th Rs.50,00,000/-. During the period of policy on 1.2.2003 at about 1.15 p.m., a group of 20 anti-social elements entered into the shop with deadly weapons and attacked the partner of the complainants and employees of the shop and thereby one Saravanan had a serious injury and the goods were damaged including electronic showcase and other valuable things. Police complaint was given and a criminal case was filed at the Judicial Magistrate Court, Jayamkondan and subsequently CB CID enquiry was made. The complainants made a claim with the opposite parties on the basis of insurance policy for the loss of goods and other damages and even after furnishing the details called for by the opposite parties in their letter dated 24.5.2006, the claim of the complainants was not finalised.

(3.) Aggrieved, consumer complaint was filed by the complainants against the opposite parties. The complaint was resisted by the opposite parties on the ground that though the surveyor has assessed the loss to the tune of Rs.15,12,058.21, but the investigator has found four bills relating to purchase of 1850.50 grams of gold jewellery as fake for which no explanation has been given by the complainants. Hence, the amount relating to 1850.50 gram gold jewellery has been deducted by the Insurance Company and the remaining amount of Rs.4,88,732/- was paid to the complainants. The State Commission after considering the evidence on record, dismissed the complaint vide its order dated 27.3.2014. Hence the present appeal.