Per Sri M.V.L.Radha Krishna Murthy, Member:

This complaint was filed u/s 12 of Consumer Protection Act praying to direct the opposite parties to pay an amount of Rs.4,40,349/- and Rs.75,275/- under two policies dated 29-03-08 ; to pay interest from the date of accident i.e.03-05-08 and subsequent interest till realization as per I.R.D.A. Rules; to pay an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- towards mental agony; and to pay an amount of Rs.10,000/- towards the legal expenses. 

1. The averments of the complaint in brief are as follows:

The complainant was doing chillies commission business at A.M.C. Guntur.  Complainant obtained two Standard Fire and special pearls policies from the opposite party, one for Rs.10,37,400/- and another for Rs.3,74,000/- respectively for a total sum of Rs.14,11,400/- for 944 and 557 bags of chillies kept in a Plot No.228.  The complainant has paid premium for both policies and the said policies are valid upto the midnight of 28-03-2009.  On the midnight of 02-05-08, 944 and 557 bags of chillies of different varieties were on the plot form of the complainant firm and the said stock was pertaining to different farmers of Guntur District.  On 03-05-08 in the early hours a major fire accident was occasioned in A.M.C, Yard wherein 2,51,746 bags of chillies were gutted in the fire accident and the said fire accident was highlighted in the electronic media and print media.  The Government have also issued G.O.R.T.609, Agricultural and Cooperative Depot, dated 21-05-08 fixing the rates of 40 kgs bags @ Rs.1200/- and Rs.3,000/- for quintal without differentiating red and white chillies.  The complainant submitted claim form to 1^st opposite party on 25-08-08.  The 1^st opposite party along with 2^nd opposite party have paid some part payments 1).  Rs.5,97,051/- and               2).  Rs.2,98,725/- on 03-05-10 to the complainant and postponing the finalizing claim and for payment of remaining amount. The complainant submitted stock particulars and also addressed letter to 1^st opposite party dated 28-01-09.  The Selection Grade Secretary of A.M.C., Guntur has confirmed the stock on the plot form of the complainant’s shop was also gutted in the fire accident in the total bags of 2,51,746.  The opposite parties have not settled the remaining claim amount inspite of the repeated requests and demands made by the complainant.  The complainant also got issued a registered notice to both opposite parties through their advocate on 30-09-11.  Both the opposite parties received the said notice, acknowledged the same and kept quite.  The complainant’s suffered mental agony due to the acts of the opposite parties.  Hence the complainant.

3.      1^st Opposite party filed its version and the same was adopted by the 2^nd opposite party.  The averments of the version of opposite parties in brief are as follows:

        Most of the allegations mentioned in the complaint are incorrect, false and the complaint is not maintainable under Law.  The complainant has taken two standard fire and pearl policies, one for Rs.3,74,000/- and another for Rs.10,37,400/- valid from 29-03-08 to 28-03-09.  The complainant has no cause of action against the opposite parties.  The 1^st opposite party assessed the loss caused to the chillies stock and paid through two cheques dated 29-03-10, one for Rs.2,98,725/- and another for Rs.5,97,051/- respectively.  The complainant received the same after duly signing the settlement intimation voucher in full and final settlement of its  claim.  It is true that fire accident occurred on the night of 03-05-08 in the A.M.C., Guntur, and several claims are made by the commission agents for their stock of chillies.  None of the commission agents submitted the required/relevant documents for settlement of claims for one reason or another.  Ultimately, the District Administration involved in the procedure of settlement of claims and conducted several meetings.  At a joint review meeting held on 22-09-09 the District Collector, Guntur, with the insurance authorities, commission agents and Chairman of A.M.C., Guntur, and marketing officials evolved the procedure for settlement of claims.  After considering various factors and views exchanged by the insurance companies and commission agents, the District Collected instructed the commission agents to submit following documents to the insurance authorities for settlement of claims for which the insurance authorities have also agreed for the same. 

List of documents to be submitted by the commission agents: 

1. policy copy/copies
2. claims form duly completed
3. copy of partnership deed in case of partnership
4. copies of VAT and CST registration certificates if any
5. Yard license copy pertaining to the plot (Form -8) and certificate issued by A.M.C., regarding damage to the shed.
6. Estimation for the reconstruction of burnt shed along with plan
7. Stock statement showing arrivals and dispatches of chilles stocks pertaining to various farmers from  23-04-08 to 03-05-08 or copy of stock registered for the above period. 
8. Copy of tak pattis/sales invoices for the above period.

The payments to the affected farmers by the commission agents after the settlement of claims will be closely monitored by the District Administration.      

The above referred documents are the minimum required documents that are necessary for settlement of claims.  Since the claims are in crores and as the public money was involved, the District Administration and the Insurance companies have taken maximum precaution so that bogus claims would not be paid.  Infact, the Insurance Companies have paid the compensation amount by way of cheques in the name of commission agents but the said cheque along with the list of formers effected was sent to the District Collector, Guntur,  who in turn to see that the amount reach the effected formers.  The opposite parties have appointed insurance surveyor to assess the loss allegedly caused and he submitted his report dated 30-10-09.  The surveyor visited the premises where the alleged loss caused and inspected the relevant records, obtained the necessary documents and submitted his report.  After going through the relevant file the 1^st opposite party observed the procedure of chili grading at Chillies Market Yard as follows. 

1.  Arrival Register :  As soon as the farmer brings his chillies stock to the market yard, their details such as name, village, number chillie bags brought, name of commission agent, and vehicle no., by which the chilles are brought to the yard will be recorded at the entrance gate itself in the arrival (inward) register. Then the stock will be unloaded at the commission agent’s shop. 

2.  Amanath Patty       :        When the stock is arrived at the shop of commission agent, he will record the same in a slip called Amanath patty and one copy will be given to the farmer. 

3.  Stock Register        :        Farmer wise arrivals and dispatches will be properly accounted by the commission agent in a register called stock register and will be endorsed by the Market Committee from time to time. 

4.  Auction                    :        The auction staff of A.M.C., will conduct open auction at each and every commission agent and will note down the successful transactions in a register called Auction register.

5.  Kata Chitty              :        After finishing of sale by auction..

6.  Tak Patty                :        After finishing of sale and

                                           weighment done…..

7.  Outward (Dispatch) Register : After completion of                                                             sale….

So far the stocks are concerned the complainant has insured 944 and 557 bags of chillies belonging to the farmers for Rs.10,37,400/- and Rs.3,74,000/-.  The inwards stocks will be auctioned by the commission agents and new stocks will be brought by the farmers and it was fluctuating.  So the question is what was the actual quantum of stock that were at the shed of the complainant at the time of fire accident and if really there is any stock.  Complainant submitted the letter issued by Selection Grade Secretary (FAC), A.M.C., Guntur, stating that 944 bags of chillies belonging to the complainant are gutted in the fire accident. The Surveyor observation is based on A.M.C., certificate, which was issued basing on the information given by the complainant and not as per their records.  As complainant submitted his affidavit stating that there were 944 bags of chillies, the A.M.C. issued certificate stating that the said stock of chillies was gutted in the fire accident.  Hence the said certificate has no authenticity and it is not conclusive proof so as to arrive the stock position at the time accident.  The Surveyor in his report observed that the District Collector, Guntur, formulated a high level committee to find out the exact quantity of chillies damaged in the fire and they submitted their report.  When compared the inward and outward register of A.M.C., none of the day to day entries are tallying with that of high level committee report.  Our enquires reveal that because of peak season, the A.M.C Staff are unable to record either the inward or outward movement of chillies.  After going through the entire file 1^st opposite party observed the following discrepancies __

1. The insured was doing the transaction of chillies in mirchi yard near big way.  The Takpatties and the values indicate these aspects. 
2. Insured submitted producer takapatties and commission agent Takapatties books for our verification. 
3. The stock register said to have been burnt in the fire accident but prepared the same for the purpose of claim from 29-45-08 onwards basing on the information available.  The number of bags given in the stock register were said to have been not sold and remained with the insured on the date wise basis after selling the stocks on day to day basis of the receipts from the farmers. 
4. Amanathpattis are not submitted by the insured and said to be lost in fire. 
5. On verification of stock register entries vice versa the Tak pattis (Both producer of commission Tak pattis), differences in the stock to the extent of 186 bags noted.
6. No transactions noted on 30-04-08 but receipts of 213 bags recorded.
7. Differences in Tak patti is for 24-04-08, 26-04-08 and 28-04-08 are noted.
8. Insured submitted detailed stock register from 24-04-08 afterwards for the purpose of claim. 
9. Insured claimed for 944 bags of chillies. 

Considering the above observations and discrepancies the differences in Tak patties, deducted from the claimed number of bags and number bags lost by the insured and assessed as detailed below :

Number of chilly bags claimed by the insured :                944 bags

Less : Difference noted in the sale invoices            186 bags  

                (90 +24+72)

Number of bags allowed for loss assessment          758 bags

Thus the total loss is 758 X 1200=  Rs.9,09,600/-

Less :: Policy Excess                    RS.   10,000/-

NET LOSS                                        RS.8,99,600/-

        The same was paid through two cheques dated 29-03-10 for Rs.2,98,725/- and another cheque for Rs.5,97,051/-.  The cheques were sent to the District Collector, Guntur on 31-03-10 as directed by the Collector in the meeting held on 02-09-10 and complainant also given consent letter to that effect.  The complainant received the above said amount voluntarily towards full and final satisfaction of his claim.  It is absolutely false to state that the opposite parties have paid part payments to the complainant and they have postponing the finalization for the remaining amount and that they have not settled the claim so far.  It is not the case of the complainant that they have received the amount under pressure or duress from the opposite parties. Infact the opposite parties assessed the loss cause to him, arrived at the quantum of stock of chillies presented at the time fire accident are 758 bags and assessed the compensation payable.  So there is no occasion for the opposite parties to make any part payment as alleged by complainant.  The complainant after satisfying and agreeing for the assessment made by the opposite parties in full satisfaction of its claim, the opposite parties prepared cheques and complainant signed on the claim disbursement voucher and opposite parties paid the amount through cheques.  It is false to state that the opposite parties kept quite without giving reply notice. The opposite parties got issued reply noticed 14-02-12 to the complainant.  But the complainant suppressed the said fact. Hence there is no deficiency of service on the part of opposite parties and the complaint is dismissed with costs. 

4.     Complainant and opposite parties have filed their respective affidavits in support of their versions. 

5.      On behalf of complainant Ex.A-1 to A-10 are marked and on behalf of opposite parties Ex. B-1 to B-8 are marked.    

6.      Now the points that arise for consideration are:

        1.  Whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of

             opposite parties?

        2.  To what relief the complainant is entitled to?

7.      POINT NO.1:- The case of the complainant is that he is doing business in chillies as commission agent at Agricultural Market Committee, herein after called as A.M.C.)  Guntur, that he has obtained two policies i.e. Standard fire and special pearls policies from the opposite party on 29-03-08, for 944 bags and 557 bags of chillies for Rs.10,37,400/- and Rs.3,74,000/- respectively and during the subsistence of the above policies, on 03-05-08 early hours a major fire accident occurred in the A.M.C., Guntur, wherein total bags of 2,51,746 were gutted in the fire, that on the mid night of 02-05-08 there are 944 and 557 bags of chillies of different varieties were on the plot form of the complainant firm and they were gutted during the fire accident that loss caused to the farmers who brought the chilly bags into the market yard and also loss caused to the owners of the shops, that the Government has issued G.O. dated 21-05-08 fixing the rate of 40 kgs bag at Rs.1200/- and Rs.3,000/- per quintal without differentiating red and white chillies, that the complainant submitted the claim form to the 1^st opposite party on 25-08-08 and that the 1^st opposite party along with 2^nd opposite party have paid some part payments of Rs.5,97,051/- and Rs.2,98,725/- to the complainant on 03-05-10 and the opposite parties have been postponing the finalization of the claim and for remaining payment, and that complainant got issued legal notice on 30-09-11 to both parties who received he same on 03-10-12 but kept quite and that thereby the complainant suffered mental agony and thus there is deficiency of service on the part of opposite parties.

8.     The case of opposite parties is that the opposite parties have assessed the loss caused to the complainant regarding chillies stock and paid Rs.2,98,725/- and Rs.5,97,051/- under two cheques dated 29-03-10 in full and final settlement of the claim to the complainant, that they have given reply notice dated 14-02-12 to the complainant  and that therefore there is no deficiency of service on the part of opposite parties. 

9.      It is not in dispute that the complainant is doing chillies commission business in the Agricultural Market Committee, Guntur, at plot No.228.  It is also not in dispute that the complainant have insured the chillies stocks of 944 and 557 bags of chillies for Rs.10,37,400/- and Rs.3,74,000/- under two policies with the opposite parties and that during the subsistence of the policies fire accident occurred on the night of 03-05-08 in Agricultural Market Committee, Guntur, and that the available stock of chillies at the shop of complainant were also gutted in the fire accident.  Complainant claimed that there are 944 and 557 bags of chillies are available as on the midnight of 02-05-08 at his shop and that the entire stock of chillies of different varieties were gutted in the fire accident and that as per the order of the Government dated 21-05-08 the rates of 40 kgs bags of chillies were fixed at Rs.1200/-.  It was alleged by the complainant that the opposite parties have paid Rs.5,97,051/- and Rs.2,98,725/- on 03-05-10 towards part payment  of the claim made by him and have been postponing finalization of the claim for payment of the remaining amount.  The burden lies on the complainant to prove that there was stock of 944 and 557 bags of chillies available on his plot form at the time of the fire accident and they were gutted in the fire accident.  While admitting the alleged fire accident the opposite parties have contended that several claims are made by the commission agents including the complainant for the stocks of chillies held by them but none of the commission agents submitted the required documents for settlement of claims for one reason or the other and ultimately the District Administration involved in settlement of claims and conducted several meetings, that at the joint review meeting held by the District Collector on 22-09-09 with the insurance authorities, commission agents and Chairman of A.M.C., considering various factors and views exchanged by the insurance companies and commission agents, the District Collector instructed the commission agents to submit certain documents to the insurance authorities for settlement of the claims for which the insurance authorities have also agreed.  The complainant filed copy of chilly stock register Ex.A-5 in support of his claim.  It is only a self serving document and it only shows that there is stock of 557 bags as on 02-05-08.  The complainant also filed copy of the letter of Agricultural Market Committee dated 28-01-09 Ex.A-6 addressed to the opposite party, wherein it was mentioned that the Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh appointed a high level committed headed by Commissioner and Director of Agricultural Marketing, Hyderabad to estimate the loss in the fire accident and the high level committed submitted detailed report to the Government informing that total 2,51,746 bags were gutted in the fire accident, that as per G.O.R.T.No.609 dated 21-05-08 the Government have fixed the rate of 40 kgs bag at Rs.1200/- and Rs.3000/- per quintal ( 100 kgs) without differentiating red and white chillies.  Further the A.M.C. informed the opposite party in Ex.A-6 letter the extent of sum insured by the complainant was for Rs.14,11,400/- worth of chillies and that total bags gutted in the fire accident are 2,51,746.  But the said letter does not disclose the available stock of the complainant at his shop at the time of the fire accident.  Complainant has not filed any document in support of his allegation that there are stocks of chillies of 944 and 557 bags of different varieties as on the midnight of 02-05-08 and the same were gutted in the fire accident.  Complainant filed two claim disbursement vouchers Exs.A-9 and A-10.  Ex.A-9 claim disbursement voucher discloses that the complainant received cheque for Rs.5,97,051/-dated 29-03-10 from opposite parties , Ex.A-10 copy of claim disbursement voucher discloses that the complainant received cheque for Rs.2,98,725/- from opposite parties.  The opposite party company appointed a surveyor to assess the loss sustained by the complainant.  The Surveyor conducted survey and submitted report Ex.B-2.  In           Ex.B-2 the Surveyor mentioned that all the commission agents are maintaining stock registers in their respective shops in the yard along with amanath patties, but these records are said to have been burnt in the fire accident.  But the other records such as Tak Patti (Sale Invoice), day book and ledger are being kept at the insured principle place of business located outside the A.M.C. premises.  When he insisted A.M.C. authorities to provide a copy of their inward and outward registers from 01-04-08 they have hesitated to provide the same and the opposite parties finally got the copies of inward and outward registers of Market Yard under R.T.I. Act and that the outward register pertaining gate No.2 for the period from 01-04-08 to 22-04-08 was said to have missed and not traced.   The Surveyor further mentioned in his report that usually the chillies brought by farmers would be auctioned on the same day or on the next day depending upon the time of arrival of stock.  The high level committee submitted a report to the Collector indicating the quantities of daily arrivals and dispatches of chillies from 01-04-08 to 03-05-08 and that when opposite parties have examined the entries of inward and outward registers with the report of the high level committee it has been observed that none of the day to day entries in outward and inward registered are tallying with that of the report of the high level committee and that it clearly shows that the inward and outward registers are not maintained properly by the A.M.C. and that their authenticity is very much doubtful.  Therefore, considering these inward and outward registers as basis for arriving the stock position of the commission agents at the time of accident is not justifiable.  The Surveyor in his report has mentioned about the procedure of the trading chillies at the Market yard.  He has stated that after finishing of sale and weighment done, the commission agents will raise a Tak Patti indicating the name of the farmer and name of trader who purchased his stock, rate per quintal, expenses incurred in the sale such as weighment charges, commission charges etc., and payment will be effected to the farmer as per Tak Patti and a copy of the said Tak Patti will be submitted to A.M.C. before 3 pm on the next day of sale.  The Surveyor in his report further mentioned that basing on the affidavit furnished by the insured the Selection Grade Secretary,   Agricultural Market Committee, Guntur, issued a certificate bearing ROC.No. 190/08 dated 26-09-09, confirming that 944 chilly bags pertaining to the complainant were gutted in the fire accident on 03-05-08 and the same was taken into account for the purpose of valuation and assessment of loss.  The said certificate bearing ROC No. 190/08 dated 26-09-09 referred by the Surveyor was not filed before this Forum.  But a letter bearing No.190/08 dated 28-01-09 addressed by the Selection Grade Secretary of A.M.C. Guntur, to the opposite party was filed before this Forum and it was marked as Ex.A-6.  As already stated above the said letter Ex.A-6 does not disclose the stock of chillies available at the shop of the complainant at the time of fire accident.  It simply mentioned the total bags gutted in the entire A.M.C.  Considering the discrepancies and the differences in Tak Patties the opposite party assessed the number of bags involved in the fire belonging to the complainant’s shop as 758 bags and assessed the net loss to a tune of Rs.8,99,600/- and accordingly made payment to the complainant under two cheques dated 29-03-10 for Rs.5,97,051/- and Rs.2,98,725/- towards full and final settlement of the claim of the complaint.  The said cheques were received by the complainant under Exs.A-9 and A-10 claim disbursement vouchers. The said claim disbursement vouchers Exs.A-9 and A-10 does not disclose that the said payment was made towards part payment.  The complainant also has not protested for receiving the said cheques.  Subsequently after a long lapse of 16 months the complainant got issued legal notice under Ex.A-7 to the opposite parties for which opposite parties have given reply notice by registered post under       Ex.B-6.  But the complainant in his complaint has stated that no reply has been given by the opposite parties for his notice.  Thus the complainant suppressed the said fact regarding the issuance of reply notice by the opposite parties.  In the reply notice also Ex.B-6 the opposite parties have mentioned that they have settled the claim of the complainant and paid the amounts under two cheques towards full and final satisfaction of the claims under the two policies of the complainant.  Now the complainant is claiming Rs.4,40,349/- and Rs.75,275/- in his complaint.  If these amounts are added to the already settled amount of Rs.8,99,600/- it will exceed the total insured amount of the complainant.  The bonafides of the claim of the complainant after a long lapse of sixteen months on the ground that opposite parties have made only part payment are doubtful and the complainant failed to produce any evidence in support of his claim regarding the stocks available in his shop at the time of the fire accident and failed to prove the allegations made by him. 

10.    During the course of arguments, in support of their case the learned counsel for opposite party relied on a decision reported in 2008(4) CPR 96 (SC), Supreme Court of India, in a case, between National Insurance Company Ltd., Vs Nipha Exports Pvt.Ltd., where in it was held that -

“Where insurance claim was settled and received by insured, in absence of any evidence that discharge voucher or receipt had been obtained from complainant fraudulently or by exercise of undue influence or by misrepresentation or the like or  coercive bargaining, consumer complaint would not lie”. 

        It is not the case of the complainant as seen from the notice Ex.A-7 dated 30-09-11 as well as the averments and affidavit of the complainant that opposite party obtained discharge voucher fraudulently or by exercise, undue influence  or by misrepresentation or the like or coercive bargaining.  Therefore, the above citation is applicable to facts of the case on hand.  Therefore, in view of the abnormal delay in issuing the said notice under Ex.A-7 by the complainant to the opposite parties, it leads us to draw an inference that the complainant received the amounts of Rs.5,97,051/- under Ex.A-9 and Rs.2,98,725/- under Ex.A-10 disbursement vouchers towards full satisfaction of his claim.  In view of the foregoing discussion and in the circumstances of the case, we cannot find any deficiency of service on the part of opposite parties.  Accordingly this point is answered.   

11.    POINT NO. 2   :- In view of the finding on point No.1, the complaint is liable to be dismissed. 

12.    In the result, the complaint is dismissed.  But in the circumstances of the case, each party shall bare their own costs. 

Typed to my dictation by Junior Stenographer, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Forum dated this the 19^th day of July, 2012.

MEMBER                                  MEMBER                           PRESIDENT

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

DOCUMENTS MARKED

For Complainants:

For Opposite Parties  :

 PRESIDENT