Haryana

Kaithal

269/21

Meet Cloth House - Complainant(s)

Versus

ICICI Lombard Gen Insurance Co Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

Sh.Harpal Duhan

04 Dec 2023

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KAITHAL

 

                                                               Complaint Case No.  269 of 2021.

                                                               Date of institution:    22.10.2021.

                                                               Date of decision:      04.12.2023.

 

1. Meet Cloth House, near HDFC Bank, Jind Moad, Rajound, Tehsil Rajound, Distt. Kaithal, through its Prop. Jasbir Singh.
2. Jasbir Singh s/o Shri Dharambir Singh, Proprietor of Meet Cloth House, near HDFC Bank, Jind Moad, Rajound, Distt. Kaithal.

                                                                                      …Complainants.

                                                     Versus

 

1. ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd., 601 & 602, 6^th Floor, Interface 16, New Linking Road, Malad (West), Mumbai-400064, through its Director/Manager/Head.
2. ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd., ICICI Lombard House, 414, Veer Savarkar Marg, near Siddhi Vinayak Temple, Prabha Devi, Mumbai-400025.
3. Branch Manager, ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd., 2^nd Floor, Sector 8, SCO 3, HUDA Market, Karnal-132001.

...Opposite Parties

 

          Complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act

 

CORAM:   SMT. NEELAM KASHYAP, PRESIDENT.

                   SMT. SUMAN RANA, MEMBER.

                   SHRI SUNIL MOHAN TRIKHA, MEMBER.

                  

Present:       Shri Harpal Duhan, Advocate, for the complainant.   

                   Shri Arvind Kumar Khurania, Adv. for the Opposite Parties.

                  

ORDER - NEELAM KASHYAP, PRESIDENT

        Complainant has filed this complaint under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) against the OPs.

2.                In nutshell, the facts of present case are that complainant No.1 is the registered firm and OP No.2 is its proprietor. Complainants firm was insured with OPs vide policy No.1016/219548273/00/000 valid from 12.04.2021 to 11.04.2022 for the amount of Rs.23 lacs. Unfortunately on 17.5.2021 at about 10:15 PM, complainant No.2 received a telephonic call from Vikas of Rajound from his mobile No.74048-23008 on his mobile No.97297-66042 that the said cloth shop has got afire and he rushed towards his shop and also fire brigade was called. The above said incident took place due to electric shot circuit and he got registered a DDR bearing No.3 dated 18.5.2021 in PS Rajound. He suffered a huge loss of Rs.30 lacs as all the clothes in the said shop were badly burnt. In this regard, he immediately gave intimation to Sanjay and Rajesh Nagpal, employees of OPs, for necessary action. Thereafter, they sent an email to OPs, who asked to submit certain documents vide letter dated 08.06.2021 and he duly submitted those documents to OPs, vide letter dated 15.06.2021. On 10.08.2021, they received an email and he submitted the reply of the same through email dated 11.8.2021. He sent so many representations to the OPs in this regard for releasing the insured amount, but all in vain. The above act and conduct of OPs, amounts to gross deficiency in service, due to which, they suffered huge physical harassment, mental agony as well as financial loss, constraining them, to file the present complaint, against the OPs, before this Commission.

3.             Upon notice, OPs appeared before this Commission and filed written statement, stating therein that as per complaint, the fire was broke out in the shop of complainant on 17.5.2021 as the complainant received telephonic message at 10:15 PM from Vikas of Rajound who has also made call to Haryana Fire Services, Kaithal. A DDR No.3 was registered on 18.5.2021 in PS Rajound on the statement of complainant Jasbir Singh. Intimation of loss was given on 26.05.2021 to the OPs by the complainant. The complainant not submitted the required details by the surveyor and insurance company time and again as per the survey report several irregularities/contraventions etc. were noticed and accordingly insurance company vide closer letter dated 31.12.2021 closed the claim of the complainant, in the light of terms and conditions of the insurance policy and in the light of facts noticed by the surveyor. As such, there is no deficiency in service on the part of OPs and prayed for dismissal the present complaint.

4.                To prove the case, complainant tendered into evidence affidavit Ex.CW1/A alongwith documents Annexure-C1 to Annexure-C19.

5.                On the other hand, OPs tendered into evidence affidavit Ex.RW1/A along with documents Annexure R1 to Annexure R9.

6.                We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record carefully.

7.                Learned counsel for the complainant has argued that complainant No.1 is the registered firm and OP No.2 is its proprietor. Complainants firm was insured with OPs vide policy No.1016/219548273/00/000 valid from 12.04.2021 to 11.04.2022 for the amount of Rs.23 lacs. He further argued that unfortunately on 17.5.2021 at about 10:15 PM, complainant No.2 received a telephonic call from Vikas of Rajound from his mobile No.74048-23008 on his mobile No.97297-66042 that the said cloth shop has got afire and he rushed towards his shop and also fire brigade was called. The above said incident took place due to electric shot circuit and the complainant got registered a DDR bearing No.3 dated 18.5.2021 in PS Rajound. He further argued that the complainant suffered a huge loss of Rs.30 lacs as all the clothes in the said shop were badly burnt. On 10.08.2021, the complainants received an email and he submitted the reply of the same through email dated 11.8.2021. He further argued that the complainants sent so many representations to the OPs in this regard for releasing the insured amount, but all in vain. The above act and conduct of OPs, amounts to gross deficiency in service.

8.                On the other hand, learned counsel for the OPs has argued that as per complaint, the fire was broke out in the shop of complainant on 17.5.2021 as the complainant received telephonic message at 10:15 PM from Vikas of Rajound who has also made call to Haryana Fire Services, Kaithal. A DDR No.3 was registered on 18.05.2021 in PS Rajound on the statement of complainant Jasbir Singh. Intimation of loss was given on 26.05.2021 to the OPs by the complainant. The complainant not submitted the required details by the surveyor and insurance company time and again as per the survey report several irregularities/contraventions etc. were noticed and accordingly insurance company vide closer letter dated 31.12.2021 closed the claim of the complainant, in the light of terms and conditions of the insurance policy and in the light of facts noticed by the surveyor. As such, there is no deficiency in service on the part of OPs and prayed for dismissal the present complaint.

9.                There is no dispute that the complainant No.2 firm namely Meet Cloth House was insured with the OPs, vide policy No.1016/219548273/00/000 valid from 12.04.2021 to 11.04.2022, for the amount of Rs.23 lacs Annexure C16.

10.              As per complainant No.2, unfortunately on 17.05.2021 at 10:15 PM, his said shop got fired due to electric shot circuit and he suffered a huge loss of Rs.30 lacs, as all the clothes in the said shop were badly burnt. The complainant No.2 got registered a DDR bearing No.3 dated 18.5.2021 in PS Rajound Annexure C1. The complainant No.2 also produced Fire entry document as Annexure C-3 and receipt of Rs.1300/- paid as Fire Event Charges Annexure C-2 on the case file. The complainant No.2 wrote letter to the OPs Annexure C-5 with a request to release the claim amount.

11.              The grievance of complainant No.2 is that he intimated the OPs in this regard, by submitting all the requisite documents with them, but they wrongly and illegally closed his claim.

12.              On the other hand, the OPs had contended that the complainants had not submitted the required details, by the surveyor and insurance company time and again as per the survey report several irregularities/contraventions etc. were noticed and accordingly insurance company, vide closer letter dated 31.12.2021, closed the claim of the complainant. Contrary to it, learned counsel for the complainants has drawn attention of this Commission towards letter dated 15.06.2021 Annexure C-6, in reply to letter dated 08.06.2021, of the OPs, vide which, complainants had sent various documents i.e. Police Report No.3 dated 18.5.2021, Fire Brigade Report, Electricity Bills and Old Photographs of inside shop, to the OPs. The OPs wrote email on dated 09.08.2021 to the complainants Annexure C-7, which was duly replied para-wise, by the complainants, vide letter dated 11.08.2021 Annexure C-13. So, from the above documents, we found that the contentions of the OPs that the complainants has neither replied nor supplied the requisite documents to them to process the claim, has no force, because complainant No.2 has sent various documents to the OPs time and again and also replied to their all queries through para-wise detailed letter Annexure C-13.                   Now the question which arises for consideration is what should be the quantum of indemnification. In his complaint, complainant No.2 has alleged that he suffered a huge loss of Rs.30 lacs, as all the clothes in the said shop were badly burnt, but he failed to produce any documentary evidence, on the case file, to prove the case, as such, this above contentions of the complainant cannot be believed. However, the OPs have deputed a surveyor namely M/s Alka Gupta & Associates, New Delhi, who submitted its detailed report as Annexure R-6, wherein at Page No.12 in column “EXCLUSION”, the said surveyor has assessed the loss amounting to the tune of Rs.17,50,084/-. The surveyor is an independent person. So, this report of surveyor Annexure R-6, is taken into consideration, for deciding the compensation amount in the complaint. In this regard, we rely upon a judgment 2(2008) CPJ page 182 (NC), United India Insurance Co. Vs. Maya, wherein, it has been held that a surveyor report should not be dismissed summarily as the surveyor is independent and qualified person under the relevant provisions of Insurance Act, 1938. In view of the report of surveyor, we are of the considered view that the complainants are entitled for an amount of Rs.17,50,084/-, on account of loss suffered by them.

14.              In view of our above discussion, we accept the present complaint and direct the OPs to pay the claim amount of Rs.17,50,084/-, to the complainants. The OPs are also directed to pay Rs.10,000/-, to the complainant, as compensation for mental agony and physical harassment, caused to the complainants, due to deficiency in services on the part of OPs, along with Rs.5,000/- as litigation expenses. The OPs is further directed to make the compliance of this order within a period of 45 days from the date of preparation of certified copy of this order, failing which, the claim amount of Rs.17,50,084/- shall carry interest @9% simple per annum, from the date of this order, till its actual realization.

15.              In default of compliance of this order, proceedings shall be initiated under Section 72 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019, as non-compliance of Court order shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than one month, but which may extend to three years, or with fine, which shall not be less than twenty five thousand rupees, but which may extend to one lakh rupees, or with both. A copy of this order be sent to the parties free of cost. File be consigned to the records, after due compliance.     

Announced in open Commission:

Dt.:04.12.2023.

                                                                                       (Neelam Kashyap)

                                                                                       President.

 

(Sunil Mohan Trikha).             (Suman Rana).              

Member.                                  Member.

 

 

 

Typed by: Sham Kalra, Stenographer.