Complainant/respondent had taken two insurance policies insuring its building for Rs.12 lakhs and stock for Rs.8 lakhs. The same were damaged due to a cyclone during the intervening night of 6/7.11.1996. Respondent lodged the claim for Rs.19,95,222.50ps. -2- Since the claim was not settled, respondent filed the complaint before the State Commission. The State Commission allowed the complaint on 08.08.2003 with the following directions: “…. On the premise that the samples were taken in the presence of the opposite parties and that they had notice of disposal of the damaged material and that there is proof of the value of the stock in factory, the claim of the complainant will be re-examined by the opposite parties and a decision taken within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of this order and while doing so the final survey report which is not filed into this commission can be taken into consideration. The complaint is accordingly allowed with the above direction in default it is open to the complainant to approach this Commission for fixation of the quantum of damages payable to him.” As per instructions given in the said order, petitioner was required to re-examine the claim of the respondent and take an informed decision within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the order and while doing so the final survey report which was not filed before the State Commission could also be taken into -3- consideration. In default it was open to the complainant to approach the State Commission for fixation of the quantum of the compensation/damages payable to him. Admittedly, petitioner did not take a decision within four weeks. Respondent/complainant approached the State Commission, as per directions issued in the earlier order, to fix the quantum of damages payable to him. During the pendency of the said application of the complainant petitioner deposited a sum of Rs.3,39,443/- before the State Commission along with a calculation sheet giving the details of assessment made by the surveyors which were Rs.51,748/- against loss/damages to the building, plant and machinery and Rs.2,87,965/- against loss of stock. Copy of the decision taken, as per direction issued, was not filed before the State Commission. Petitioner also did not file the surveyor’s report. Since the petitioner had failed to produce the decision taken in pursuance to the direction issued in the order dated 08.08.2003 and produce the surveyor’s report, the State -4- Commission disposed of the application filed by the respondent in the following terms by the impugned order:- “Complainant’s report is not filed. After receiving final surveyor’s report, the Insurance Company by its letter dated 08.10.1997 informed the complainant that the claim towards first policy will be settled for Rs.44,220/-. It is also admitted that the opposite party No.2 requested the complainant to draw samples for sending them to CFTRI, Mysore for analysis. The samples were not taken in the presence of Surveyor. Stock was totally damaged. Even though under the firstly policy opposite party offered Rs.44,220/- now they paid Rs.51,746/-. So as far as damage caused to the stock, the opposite party estimated it Rs.2,87,965/-. Surveyor’s report is not filed. The stock is insured for Rs.8 lakhs. The case of the complainant is that the value of the stock is Rs.10,00,426/-. The opposite party issued a stock insurance of Rs.8 lakhs. Hence, complainant not entitled for Rs.10 lakhs. The opposite party did not file any evidence though ample opportunity was given. Opposite party did not present when the matter is adjourned for arguments. Even now the opposite party did not file the final survey report. Therefore the opposite parties are liable to pay Rs.8 lakhs towards loss caused to the stock. So totally the complainant is entitled to Rs.8,51,756/-. The opposite party already paid Rs.3,39,443/-. So the opposite parties are liable to pay the balance amount of Rs.5,12,313/-.” The State Commission directed the petitioner to pay Rs.8,51,756/- in all to the respondent/complainant. Since the petitioner had already paid Rs.3,39,443/-, the direction was given to pay the balance amount of Rs.5,12,313/-. While admitting, this Commission stayed the operation of the impugned order of the State Commission subject to payment of Rs.6 Lacs directly to the respondent after adjusting the amount which had ordered to be paid within 6 weeks. Counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner has paid Rs.6 Lacs to the respondent including the sum of Rs.3,39,443/- depsoited before the State Commission. Admittedly, petitioner did not take an informed decision as per order dated 08.08.2003. Petitioner did not produce the surveyor’s report before the State Commission. By order dated 08.08.2003, petitioner was directed to take a decision within 4 weeks failing which the complainant was put at liberty to approach the State Commission for fixation of the amount of compensation/damages. Petitioner did not take any decision within four weeks or thereafter. It simply deposited the sum of Rs.3,39,443/- before the State Commission along with calculation sheet. The direction issued by the State -6- Commission in its order dated 08.08.2003 requiring the petitioner to take a decision was not complied with. The surveyor’s report was also not produced before the State Commission. Under the circumstances, the State Commission on the basis of the evidence present on record has calculated the loss/damage at Rs.8,51,726/-. The attitude of the petitioner has been of ‘total non-cooperation’ and the State Commission under the circumstances has rightly proceeded to assess the loss/damage on the basis of the evidence present on record. No interference is called for. Dismissed. | 
