NAYAK MILLS Vs. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both the appeals are directed against the order dated 19.5.1995 passed by District Forum, Samastipur in Complaint Case No.16 of 1995 and hence are being disposed of by this common judgment. Appeal No.453/95 has been filed by Naik Mills through its proprietor Arjun Prasad Naik who was complainant before the District Forum in the said Case No.16 of 1995. Appeal No.472/95 has been filed by National Insurance Company Ltd. (opposite party before the District Forum) having Branch Office at Samastipur and Divisional Office at Muzaffarpur through its Deputy Manager of Regional Office at Patna. By the impugned order the District Forum has directed the National Insurance Company to pay Rs.1,14,500/- to the complainant as insurance claim within one month with Rs.100/- as cost. The said complainant has filed the said appeal No.453/95 for correcting the said amount of Rs.1,14,500/- as 1,30,500/- and allowing him Rs.20,000/- as compensation for the damage caused to the machine, Rs.35,000/- as compensation for avoidance on the part of the Insurance Company in settlement of the insurance claim and Rs.5,000/- as cost of the case. Besides that there is also prayer for cost of Appeal No.453/95. On the other hand the National Insurance Company has filed the said Appeal No.472/95 for setting aside the impugned order.

(2.) The case of the complainant (appellant in Appeal No.453/95) before the District Forum was that Naik Mills had been insured by the National Insurance Company for Rs.1,50,000/- for the period 6.2.1994 to 5.2.1995 under Insurance Policy Nos.7504855/94 and 3104023/94. In between the night of 7th and 8th April, 1994 there was incident of fire in the mill. Fire Brigade was informed and the fire was extinguished with the help of the Fire Brigade. The police and the Insurance Company were informed about the incident of fire and insurance claim was preferred. The Insurance Company appointed a Surveyor who submitted his report but his claim was not settled which led to the filing of complaint case before the District Forum. In the complaint petition damage to granules of tobacco stem, crusher machine and building shown as Rs.1,45,000/-, Rs.20,000/-, and Rs.40,000/- respectively but the insurance claim was confined to Rs.1,50,000/- only. Besides this, Rs.35,000/- was claimed as compensation. Interest at the rate of 24% over the insurance claim of Rs.1,50,000/- was also claimed.

(3.) Written statement was filed on behalf of the opposite party-Insurance Company before the District Forum and the case was contested. The case of the opposite party was that the complainant had got no cause of action and the right to file the case as the insured was State Bank of India, Dalsinghsarai Branch and it is the said Bank which is competent to lodge any claim and to receive compensation, if any, payable under the terms of the policy. The mill was not running regularly and was in the stage of winding up. The proprietor of the mill under a deliberate planning manufactured the entire fire panorama to grab money from the Insurance Company and to digest the Bank loan. The Surveyor who visited the spot had reported that at most the insured articles worth Rs.25,800/- had been damaged and destroyed. The building had not been insured but a false claim has been advanced with regard to damage to the building. The complainant was required to provide the position of stock and other details but he failed to do so till 24.8.1995 which goes to show that bogus and fictitious details have been provided after inordinate delay. The claim of the complainant was in the process of re-assessment on his request and the office of the Insurance Company and the duly authorised Surveyor of Government of India was waiting for the papers on the basis of which re-assessment could be done but the complainant did not provide the papers and keeping the office of the Company and Surveyor in dark filed the complaint case stealthly and under the circumstances there was no deficiency in service on the part of the Insurance Company. On the allegations aforesaid the Insurance Company (opposite party) had prayed for dismissal of the case.