ORDER

Date of order:   19-04-2017

Upendra Jha,Member       

                            This appeal is preferred against the order dated 11-02-2015 passed by the District Consumer Forum, Patna in Complaint Case No. 342 of 2007 by which the appellants are directed to calculate a fresh claim of the respondent by treating the Chalan of the complainant as genuine and make payment accordingly within a month with 9% interest and to pay a compensation of Rs. 50,000/- and litigation cost of Rs. 2000/-.

2.                Briefly stated the case of the complainant is that he purchased two policies from the O.Ps.-appellants of goods value Rs.6,00,000/-, covering burglary. After breaking the locks, the insured goods stored in Godown was stolen on 17-06-1999.F.I.R. was lodged, claim was filed before the appellants who deputed a surveyor who found that stock statement reported to Bank of April & May’99 was differently recorded in respect to   auditors statement. The Chalan of Aaron Babcom Ltd., Culcutta is only stock transfer for which insured was covered. The surveyor assessed the loss of Rs. 36,612.90/- which was not accepted by the complainant. He filed a complaint before this Commission which was remanded to the District Forum for hearing. The O.Ps. contested the case. The District Forum passed the impugned order against which this appeal is preferred.

3.                           Respective written notes of arguments have been filed by the parties. The appellant has filed supplementary affidavit. Heard and perused the District Forum order.

4.                           The District Forum has held the deficiency on the part of the Insurance Company and has passed the impugned order.

5.                           The counsel for the appellant submits that the respondent is in business of Medicine, so he is not a Consumer. The surveyor reported a loss of Rs. 36,612.90/- due to theft and surveyor’s report is an important document to assess the loss, it cannot be ignored, but the District Forum has not considered this point. The complainant could not justify the claimed amount of Rs. 7,44,233.70/-.The insurance was for Rs. 6,00,000/- only where as claimed amount is  for Rs. 7,44,233.70/- which is  not proper. Surveyor did not consider the products of M/S  Indo Tech, Inc, Kolkata as the insured did not produce any invoice and  did not give convincing reply regarding transportation of stocks and Chalans produced by the complainant and consider it as false. The appellant settled the claim on the basis of surveyor’s report and informed vide letter dated 11-06-2001.But the District Forum has not considered the surveyor’s report. Hence, the order under appeal is fit to be set aside. In supplementary affidavit the appellant states that so called Chalan issued by the courier at Kolkata was never been brought on record.

6.                           The counsel for the respondent submits that a theft was committed in the insured Godown of the complainant on 17-06-1999. F.I.R. was lodged. The amount of Insurance is Rs. 16, 00,000/-. Mr. A. K.Ojha and Mr. R.K.P.Singh surveyors assessed the loss Rs. 36,612.90/- only with ill motive. The Chalans of M/S- Indo Tech Inc. Worth Rs. 7,44,233/- was not considered and paid. Vague and irrelevant grounds had been taken to harass the respondent. The Insurance Company appointed an investigator S. Mukharjee of Kolkata to test the genueness of the surveyor’s report & certificates. The Bank has supported the claim of the respondent. These points with documents have been considered by the District Forum and has passed the impugned order which is proper and justified. It needs no interference. The appeal having no merit be dismissed.

 7.                            We have considered the submissions of parties. On perusal of the order passed by the District Forum as also the material available on record, it appears that the District Forum has considered the matter in correct perspective. It is admitted that the goods of the complainant was insured for Rs. 16, 00,000/- by the appellants-O.Ps. and it  was stolen on 17-06-1999.The police found the theft occurrence from the  complainant claimed for Rs. 8,48,698/- but the appellant on the basis of surveyor report settled the claim for Rs. 36,612.90/- only. Surveyor’s report to assess the loss is an important document .It cannot be ignored without justified ground as held by the Hon’ble Apex Court in several decisions. But the copy of the surveyor’s report had been served to the complainant by the appellant during pendency of the complaint. It is deficiency on the part of the appellant-Company. District Forum has rightly passed the  order to calculate a fresh the claim of the complainant with due notice to the  complainant within two months and settle the  claim within  further one month period, failing which 9% interest will be payable. We do not find any illegality in the District Forum order and there is no reason to take a different view in this matter. However, the compensation should be reasonable in the facts of each individual case. We are of the view that compensation of Rs. 10,000/- shall meet the end of justice. Hence, the District Forum order is modified as above and the appeal is partly allowed.

       S.K.Sinha                         Renu Sinha                  Upendra Jha                                                                      

      President                           Member (F)                  Member (M)

           Anita