BEFORE THE  

E.A.No.6 of 2013 IN C.C.NO.22 OF 2010

   1.  M/s Khammam-003, rep. by its
Managing Partner,2.  B.Nageswar R/o H.No.3-1-118/4, Mohan Road
       

1.  The Oriental Insurance A-25/27,

2.  The Branch Manager
The Oriental Insurancest                          

Counsel for the complainants        Counsel    

 QUORUM:       SRI R.LAKSHMINARSIMHA RAO, HON’BLE MEMBER

TWO THOUSAND THIRTEEN

1. 

2.       

3.     

4.     

In the result the complaint is allowed directing the opposite parties to depute a surveyor to assess the loss caused to the insured stock and settle the claim basing on the surveyor’s report. The costs of the`5,000/-.

5.               

We were given to understand by the insured that at about 10.30

We had not only verified the insured’s stock records and noted the stocks lying in the insured’s riot affected premises (as well as other shops/

The insured had projected the loss based on the difference of the book balances and the ground balances of the involved items as noted during the survey, however, after adjusting the quantities recovered by the police, which came to Rs.75,06,296.  However, after having deducted Rs.42,80,574 ( on account of 62.18% under-insurance) and Rs.10,000/- towards policy excess, we had adjusted the loss as Rs.25,93,591 subject to the terms, conditions and warranties of the contract of insurance against which this claim was made.

Later when the insuring office sought the bifurcated values of the looted/stolen goods and the damaged/destroyed materials, we, vide our 28 Aug 2009 email, had clarified that ‘the rioters had only looted insured properties and did not destroy any of the stocks lying therein’.    

6.             

You were also informed through the same

Regarding the survey process surely, it was in your full knowledge and evidently, you have constantly interacted with the surveyor, for concluding the survey findings. 

Further, to avoid any ambiguity in the matters of crystallisation of liability under policy for the said loss, we have taken clarifications again from the surveyor, who had categorically expressed the loss occasioned was due to the sole reason of looting which is out of the purview of the policy and it’s terns 

It may be noted that the case of

7.               

12. 

14. 

15.      

8.       Taking into consideration of the attending circumstances, we are inclined to hold that the respondents have to settle the claim in terms of the assessment

9.              

                                                                               MEMBER

కె.ఎం.కె*