West Bengal

Birbhum

CC/13/139

Sunil Roy C/o Raksha Kali Saw Mill, - Complainant(s)

Versus

Br. Manager, National Insurance Co. Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

S. Acharya

14 Jul 2015

ORDER

JUDGEMENT
BIRBHUM DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
CHANDNIPARA PO AND PS SURI
BIRBHUM PIN 731101
WEST BENGAL
 
Complaint Case No. CC/13/139
 
1. Sunil Roy C/o Raksha Kali Saw Mill,
Nanoor, P.O. and P.S. Nanoor, Dist. Birbhum.
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. Br. Manager, National Insurance Co. Ltd.
Suri Branch, P.O. and P.S. Suri, Dist. Birbhum.
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
  ABDUL QUADER PRESIDENT
  DR. SOUMEN SIKDER MEMBER
  MISS RINA MUKHERJEE MEMBER
 
For the Complainant:S. Acharya, Advocate
For the Opp. Party:
ORDER

The complainant, Sunil Roy, Proprietor of Raksha Kali Saw Mill filed a complaint stating that on 12.01.2011 fire broke out at Raksha Kali Saw Mill at about 2.30 A.M. Fire Brigade was informed over telephone. Several articles were burnt to ash before putting out fire by local people and fire brigade. The Saw Mill was insured under the O.P National Insurance Company. The complainant informed the Insurance Company of the incident. Later, the complainant submitted the claim form duly filled up along with the relevant documents. The O.P did not settle the claim and sent repudiation letter to the complainant. So, he has come to the Forum for proper relief.

The O.P, National Insurance Company Ltd. contested the case. He stated that the complainant failed to produce any document relating to stock and other materials and machines damaged by fire before the Surveyor and the O.P. Therefore, the claim could not be settled.

Upon pleading the parties the points are to be considered for discussion;

  1. Whether the O.P has deficiency in service or not?
  2. Is the complainant entitled to relief as prayed for?

Decision with reaSons

The Forum heard Ld. Advocates of both sides and perused the record. Undoubtedly, Raksha Kali Saw Mill was caught fire on 12.01.2011. It was insured under the O.P National Insurance Company vide policy No. 150401/11/10/3100000017. The complainant informed O.P Insurance Company in due time. The O.P sent Surveyor to the spot. Up to this stage, there is no dispute between the parties. As per O.P’s argument the complainant did not produce any documents relating to the lost materials by fire. Claim would be settled on what basis. The complainant failed to produce stock register and other documents. The complainant argued that all the documents including stock register lost by fire at that time. So, the claim would be settled on the basis of spot verification and documents filed at the time of policy taken.

As per Fire Brigade report medium category of fire broke out and it was industrial type of fire. The report also reveals that damaged materials were meter box, main switch, Starter, Saw Machines, Motor, Trolley Big size Motor and size woods. In the column of estimated value it was reported that loss of amount was around Rs. 4,00,000 as per opinion of the owner.

On the other hand, the inspection report of the Surveyor appointed by the O.P reveals that some woods were arranged and fire was set up. The shed was damaged and many stock surrounding the places of fire were also damaged in this fire. The insured was asked to submit all the books and documents purchase and sales documents for investigation. But he failed to produce these before the O.P.

The insured claimed that all the documents were lost in fire. That is why, he was unable to produce the documents before the O.P.

From these two reports discussed above, it is crystal clear that fire has damaged the Saw Mill and some stock was also damaged. Therefore, the claim of the insured is valid. But it is also a question how the loss can be assessed in terms of money. The bills and vouchers for repairing the machinery and others were submitted by the insured. These were prepared without putting date. Therefore, it is not clear whether the bills and vouchers were prepared before or after the date of fire occurred. The complainant did not examine the persons who issued the bills to prove authenticity of the bills. So, the evidential value of these documents is nil.

In such situation the Forum finds that there was no numerical data to assess the loss by fire. But it is proved that fire has damaged certain machinery and stock. So, the Forum thinks that it would be just and proper if the insured gets a lump sum amount of Rs. 2,00,000 as compensation.

Proper fees have been paid.

Hence,

O R D E R E D

that C.F case No. 139/2013 be and the same is allowed in part on contest  without cost  against the O.P.

            The O.P is directed to pay Rs 2,00,000 to the complainant within one month from the date of order failing which the complainant shall be at liberty to resort to due process of law and procedure. 

Copy of this order be supplied to the parties each free of cost.

 
 
[ ABDUL QUADER]
PRESIDENT
 
[ DR. SOUMEN SIKDER]
MEMBER
 
[ MISS RINA MUKHERJEE]
MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.