SMT. BANDANA ROY, PRESIDENT

            The gist of the complaint case is that  the complainant took a loan from the OP No. 3 for expanding his business namely M/S. Model Furniture House. The Branch Manager of the OP no. 3 took the initiative to take an insurance policy being No. OG-15-2422-4001-00002071 on behalf of the complainant after taking signature of the complainant on the insurance papers.  The premium of the Insurance Policy was being regularly deducted from the A/C of the complainant and credited in the A/C of the insurance.  On 08.11.2015 a fire broke up in the shop of the complainant namely M/S. Model Furniture House and the complainant suffered money loss of Rs. 7,50,000/- for damage of valuable furniture and timbers.  The said incident was informed to the OC Panskura PS and also to the Manager of the OP no. 3 in writing. The incident was appraised to the OP Insurance Co. on 23.11.15. It is the case of the complainant that due to illness of his family members  and treatment thereof, the complainant delayed for 15 days to inform the Insurance Co. about the damage by fire. On 24.11.15 Surveyor of the OP Insurance Co made inspection of the gutted go down of the complainant and assessed the loss. On 26.03.2016 the Insurance Co. by a letter addressed to the proprietor of the said business informed that they would not give any compensation for delay reposting and violating the terms and conditions of the policy.  

Hence, the instant case with the prayers as made in the complaint petition on the allegation of deficiency of service on the part of the OPs.

            The OP No.1 & 2 appeared and contested the case by filing a single written version.  This OPs prayed for dismissal of the case as non - maintainable under various provisions of law.

            The specific defense of these OPs is that the policy in question was Standard Fire And Special Perils Police of M/S Model Furniture House.  On 23.11.15 the OP was informed about the fire when the incident was actually occurred on 08.11.2015. The owner lodged complaint being GD No. 3438 dated 09.11.2015 of Panskura PS.  The construction of the shop room -cum - go down of the complainant was Katcha Construction which is violation of the terms and condition of the policy. The surveyor of the OP Co. sent written letters to the complainant several times for submission of various necessary documents to substantiate his claim  but the complainant did not submit the same. Ultimately on 26.03.2016 the OP repudiated the claim of the complainant by sending letter through registered post.

            Under the above circumstances, the OPs pray for dismissal of the claim of the complainant.

          The OP No. 3 did not appear to contest the case. Also it appears that there is no relief sought against this OP no. 3 United Bank of India Panskura Brach.           

            Point to be considered in this case is whether the case is maintainable and (2) whether Complainant is entitled to the relief(s) sought for by the complainant.

Decision with reasons

            Both the points are taken up together for consideration for the sake of convenience.

            We have carefully perused the affidavit of the complainant, the written version. WNA  and all  the documents filed by both the parties and heard the submission of the ld advocate for the complainant.  Seen the questionnaires and reply thereto, filed by the OP no. 1 and the complainant and the reply thereto. Heard the elaborate argument advanced by both the parties during argument.

            We have gone through the documents filed by the parties very carefully. Admittedly  the policy in question was Standard Fire And Special Perils Police of M/S Model Furniture House.  OP had stated that the fact of fire was informed to them on 23.11.2015 to the effect that the fire broke out on 08.11.2015.  The owner lodged complaint being GD No. 438 dated 09.11.2015 before the Panskura PS.  The delay of such delay intimation to the Insurance Co. was not explained by the complainant satisfactorily.   The grievance of the complainant is that  the insurance Co used to deduct regular premiums from his A/C . Fire broke out in his shop room  on 08.11.2015 at  about 2. PM  and valuable timbers and furniture were gutted and damaged by such fire which incurred a loss of Rs. 7,50,000/- to the complainant.

            It appears that the incident took place on 08.11.2015 and the incident was informed to the Panskura Police Station in writing on 09.11.2015   and the matter was also informed to the Branch Manager of UBI Panskura Branch  on the same day. Information was also sent to the Insurance Co.,the OP No.1 & 2 on 23.11.2015 which is after 15 days of the incident. The complainant has stated that the delay in intimating the fact to the Insurance Co was due to illness of some family members of the complainant and  for their treatment the complainant was busy. But the complainant did not submit any such treatment paper  to explain the delay properly.  The surveyor  of the OP No.1 inspected the go down  on 24.11.2015 and ascertained the loss of fire and assessed the net  compensation  from the  Insurance Co. but  the OP repudiated the said claim vide letter dated 26.03.2016 stating that the incident of fire was on 08.11.2015 but  it was reported to the Insurer  on 23.11.2015. After considerable delay which is violation of the policy conditions.  Clause 6(i)  of the policy says “ On the happening  of any loss or damage insured shall forthwith give notice thereof to the Company and  shall within 15 days after the loss  or damage  or such further time as the Co. may in writing allow in that behalf, deliver  to the company a) a claim in writing for the loss of damage containing as particular  an account as may be reasonably practicable of all the several articles or items or property damaged or destroyed and of the amount of the loss or damage thereto, respectively, having regard to their value at the time of the loss or damage not including profit of any kind.  It is also stated that the shop - cum office  was of  kutcha construction. This is violation of the construction warranty imposed in the policy Construction warranty states, “Warranted that the building covered under the policy in which the contents covered under this policy is present is not kutcha construction as descried below, kutcha construction is defined as buildings having walls and or/  roofs of wooden planks/thatched leaves and/or grass/hay of any kind/bamboo  pl…. and the like.  The OPs No 1 and 2 also alleged that surveyor had send several letters for submission of various documents to substantiate the claim but the complainant did not send the same.  So there was no other way but to repudiate the claim on 26.03.2016 by sending letter through registered post. It also alleged that the complainant has tried to grab money in an illegal manner.

            The complainant filed examination in - chief on affidavit and  claimed Rs. 7,50,000/- towards compensation, cost and harassment and simultaneously the complainant admits that the OP repudiated the claim only for delay in giving information of the fire.  The OPs 1 and 2 cross-examined the complainant by way of filing questionnaires. The complainant explained the delay  in intimating about the incident  by saying  that due to mental agony and mental misbalance for more than one of the family members’ illness at that time.  But the complainant did not file  a single document in support of the illness as asserted by him. The complainant also alleged that the Insurance Co. took regular premiums  from 2004 to 2015 but raised no objection to take premiums but when the incident occurred  they raised various objections.

            It appears that the complainant has filed copy of documents asked for by the OP, before this Forum on 02.7.2018.  Before that the complainant did not file the documents before the OPs or this Forum.

            Without proper assessment by a Surveyor  the claim cannot be  given to the complainant at this stage.  We are of the view that the OPs no 1and 2 should assess the claim  of the complainant within two months from the date of this order.  But considering all the above aspects, the claim is refused at this stage.

            Both the points are answered accordingly.          

            Hence, it is

O R D E R E D

That CC/557 of 2017 be and the same is dismissed on contest against the OPs No. 1 and 2  and  dismissed ex parte against the OP no.3 UBI, Panskura Branch, with a liberty given to the complainant to file all relevant documents  filed by him before this Forum on 02.07.2018 to the OP Insurance Co.  within two months from the date of this order and then the OPs 1 and 2 shall calculate the loss as per report of the surveyor and will pay the same amount to the complainant within two months from the date of this order, failing which the OPs 1 and 2 shall be liable to pay 10% interest on the assessed amount. 

The complainant is also given liberty to file fresh case if the claim is not settled as per above observations within the stipulated time as above.

Parties do bear their respective costs.

Let copy of the judgment be supplied to all the parties free of cost.