DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION: WEST TRIPURA : AGARTALA

 

 

CASE   NO:   CC- 60 of  2023

 

 

Sri Ranjit Bhowmik,

S/O- Late Parvati Charan Bhowmik,

Nalgaria, Jirania,

P.S. Ranir Bazar, 

P.O.- Ranir Bazar, 

District- West Tripura, 

Pin- 799035. .......Complainant.

 

 

-VERSUS-

 

 

1.Cholamandalam MS General 

Insurance Company Limited.,

2nd Floor, DARE House,

2 NSC Bose Road, Parrys,

Chennai- 600001.

 

 

2.Cholamandalam MS General Insurance 

Company Limited Agartala Branch,

Represented by its Manager,

RMS Chowmuhani, Mantri Bari Road,

P.O. Agartala, P.S. West Agartala.

Agartala, West Tripura, 

Pin- 799001. .......Opposite Parties.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   ________PRESENT__________

 

 SRI GOUTAM DEBNATH

PRESIDENT,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER  

DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

      WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA. 

 

DR(SMT) BINDU PAUL

MEMBER,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER  DISPUTES  

REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA. 

 

SRI SAMIR GUPTA

MEMBER,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER  DISPUTES  

REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA. 

 

C O U N S E L

 

 

For  the  O.Ps : Sri Subhajit Chakraborty,

 

 

 

 

F I N A L    O R D E R

1. Ranjit Bhowmik here-in-after called the “complainant” has filed this complaint against the Cholamandalam MS General Insurance Co. Ltd. here-in-after called the “O.Ps”.

 

1.1 The complainant insured his Dokaan at Nalgaria, Jirania for a period from  17th March, 2022 till 16th March, 2023. 

1.2 Unfortunately on 26th March, 2022 at 1.45 A.M. fire broke out in the shop of the complainant due to electric short circuit. As a result his shop and belongings  to the shop were gutted into fire. 

1.3 The complainant informed the O.P. including the Secretary of the Bazar Samity. The O.P. employed its surveyor who prepared a report that the complainant has suffered a loss for Rs.10,10,220/-.

1.4 The O.P. conducted paper works and obtained blank cheque from the complainant with a view to pay the amount of loss but ultimately after few weeks repudiated the claim on the ground  of “breach of kutcha construction warranty”.

1.5 Hence, this complaint claiming compensation for Rs.6 lakhs with interest, litigation cost etc.  

 

2. The O.P. submitted written objection alleging inter alia that at the time of issuance of policy the type of building  was mentioned as “Pucca” and said policy was issued subject to terms of conditions but the construction of the complainant was “kutcha” construction. Hence, this was a breach of policy condition. 

 

3. Both the parties submitted evidence on affidavit along with policy schedule, report of the surveyor.

3.1 The O.P. has not submitted the proposal form.  

 

4. The following points are taken up for discussion and decision:-

  (ii) Whether the O.Ps are guilty of deficiency in service?

 

 

 Decision and reasons for decision:-

5. The policy of the complainant has not been disputed by the O.P. Only contention raised by the O.P. is that the complainant has violated  the condition of the policy having a 4 wall tin roof construction  which is a “Kutcha” construction. Even the final Survey Report submitted by the surveyor appointed by the O.Ps  no where mentioned that the complainant violated policy condition due to “kutcha” construction. Rather, the surveyor assessed loss @ Rs.3,99,370/- after all sort of statutory deductions. Further, the O.P. has not submitted the proposal form. The Policy schedule as available on record, in the definition clause defines building does not speak that a pucca  wall with tin roof building is a “Kutcha” construction.

5.1 Meaning thereby, the stand taken by the O.P. is absolutely devoid of merit. As such the O.Ps are grossly deficient in service. 

5.2 Both the points are decided accordingly. 

 

6. In the result, it is ordered that the O.Ps shall pay the sum of Rs.3,99,370/- to the complainant within a period of 30 days from today, otherwise it shall carry interest @ 7.5% P.A. from today till the date of actual payment. In addition to that the O.P. shall pay a further sum of Rs.1 Lac as compensation to the complainant inclusive of litigation cost as complainant has suffered business loss due to gross negligence of the O.Ps.

7. The case stands disposed off.

8. Supply free copy of this Final Order to the parties.  

 

Announced.

 

 

 

SRI  GOUTAM DEBNATH

PRESIDENT,

DISTRICT CONSUMER  DISPUTES 

REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA

 

 

 

 

DR(SMT) BINDU PAUL

MEMBER,

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA.

 

 

SRI SAMIR  GUPTA

MEMBER,

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA.