PER SHRI. S.S. PATIL – HON’BLE MEMBER
1) This is the complaint regarding repudiation of the insurance claim of the Complainant by Opposite Party No.1 on irrelevant grounds as stated by the Complainant.
2) The facts of the complaint as stated by the Complainant are that, the Complainant is all India Road Transport organization. It has taken a Transit-cum- Storage Insurance Policy No.260800/21/05/4400000015 valid from 01/04/05 to 31/03/06 from Opposite Party No.1. During the policy period, the Complainant lodged an insurance claim with reference to claim Ref.No. Golden Chokdi Fire case containing GC No.1820319 & 5362335 for Rs.81,121/-. The Complainant has not mention the date on which the claim was lodged and with whom it was lodged.
3) The Complainant has stated that it was covered under Marine Policy and Fire Floater Policy. On 15/05/06 fire broke at Baroda Godown (Golden Chokdi). A surveyor was appointed by the Insurance Company. The surveyor directly submitted the report to Insurance Co. (The dates as to when the information about the fire was given, when Insurance Co. appointed a surveyor and when the surveyor was submitted it report, was not mentioned by the Complainant).
4) On 25/06/07, Complainant’s Ex-director visited Opposite Party No.1 and he was assured of release of the claim amount on 28/06/07. Opposite Party No.1 raised queries and requested Complainant to submit the original consignee copy of SNF India Pvt. Ltd. and reason for keeping the goods in godown for a considerable period of time i.e. 11/03/06 to 05/05/06. On 09/08/07, Complainant replied all the queries raised by the Opposite Party No.1, by attaching the original copy of SNF (India) Pvt. Ltd., and stated that party has not taken the delivery of consignment and therefore, it was lying in the godown. On 29/10/07, Opposite Party No.1 raised other queries. 22/11/07, Complainant answered all the queries. On 08/12/07 the Complainant intimated the Opposite Party No.1 that it is ready to settle at 90 % claim amount and sent documents pointing out that the payment has been made to its’ party.
On 04/06/08 Reminder was sent to Opposite Party No.1.
On 12/06/08 Reminder was sent to Opposite Party No.1.
On 04/07/08 Reminder was sent to Opposite Party No.1.
On 10/09/08 Opposite Party No.1 acknowledged the reminders and assured to take up the matter to Mumbai R O II.
On 17/11/08 Reminder was sent to Opposite Party No.1.
On 02/12/08 Reminder alongwith details of all pending claims were sent to Opposite Party No.1 by the Complainant.
However, Opposite Party vide its letter dtd.09/02/09 denied the claim on the ground that the details were not submitted on time. After that the Complainant vide its letter dtd.15/04/09, refute the contention of the Opposite Party No.1 but the Opposite Party No.1 did not allow the insurance claim.
5) Finally, the Complainant has claimed the reliefs as follows -
a) Complainant’s claim amount of Rs.81,121/- with reference to Golden Chokdi Fire case containing CG No.1820319 &
5362335 compensation of Rs.2,50,000/- and cost of Rs.50,000/- with interest @ 18 % p.a.
6) The Complainant has attached the xerox copies of the following documents to the complaint.
a) Multi Transit-cum-Storage Policy No.260/00/21/05/4400000015 period 01/04/05 to 31/03/06.
b) Only a front page of Floater Policy No.260800/11/05/3100000177 valid from 01/07/05 to 30/06/06.
c) Letter dtd.28/06/07 from Opposite Party No.1 to the Complainant
d) Letter dtd.09/08/07 from the Complainant to Opposite Party No.1.
e) Letter dtd.29/10/07 from Opposite Party No.1 to the Complainant.
f) Letter dtd.08/12/07 from the Complainant to Opposite Party No.1.
g) Letter dtd.04/06/08 from the Complainant to Opposite Party No.1.
h) Letter dtd.10/09/08 from Opposite Party No.1 to the Complainant.
i) Letter dtd.17/11/08 from the Complainant to Opposite Party No.1.
j) Letter dtd.02/12/08 from the Complainant to Opposite Party No.1.
k) Letter dtd.09/02/09 from Opposite Party No.1 to the Complainant.
l) Letter dtd.15/04/09 from the Complainant to Opposite Party No.1.
m) Notice of the Adv. Shri Umesh Desai, dtd.27/06/09 addressed to Opposite Party No.1.
n) Particulars of the claim.
7) The complaint was admitted and notices were served on the Opposite Parties. Inspite of service on Opposite Party No.2, he did not remain present before this Forum. Hence, ex-parte order has been passed vide Raznama dtd.07/02/2011. The Advocate for Opposite Party No.1 appeared before this Forum on 07/02/2011 and promised to file written statement of Opposite Party No.1 but subsequently failed to attend this Forum and failed to file the written statement of the Opposite Party No.1. Therefore, the matter was argued on 03/08/2011 without the written statement of Opposite Party No.1.
8) Meanwhile the Complainant filed affidavit of evidence and written argument wherein the facts mentioned in the complaint are reiterated. We heard the Ld.Advocate for the Complainant and perused documents filed by it and our findings are as follows.
9) The Complainant has obtained a Transit-cum-Storage Insurance Policy from Opposite Party No.1 for the period from 01/04/05 to 31/03/06 and Floater Policy No.260800/11/05/310000017 valid from 01/07/05 to 30/06/06. During the validity of this Floater Policy only (and not Transit and Storage Insurance Policy) a fire broke at Baroda Godown, Golden Chokadi. The Complainant has failed to mention, as to what material was damaged/lost in the fires ? What was the valuation of that material ? When the intimation was given to the Opposite Party No.1 ? and when the surveyor was appointed ? When he surveyed the loss/damage ?
10) The Complainant has averred in the complaint that on 25/6/07, i.e. after more than one year, its director visited the Opposite Party No.1 office and he was assured by the Opposite Party No.1 that the payment against the claim would be released. This is only an averment, not supported by any documentary evidence.
11) It is also averred by the Complainant that in June, 2007, some queries were raised by the Opposite Party No.1 to which the Complainant has replied in Aug., 2007.
On 29/10/07 the Opposite Party No.1 again has raised some important queries as “1) As per terms of carriage, what is the normal period allowed by you for taking delivery ? 2) What are the charges levied by you for storage of goods beyond the normal delivery period ? 3) Is there any liability on your part if the client has not taken delivery within stipulated time ? 4) Please refer to Consignment Note, stating that there would be no liability if delay/rebooking is not done within one month. 5) Why the Consigner has submitted a letter on 25/05/06 when the loss has taken place on 15/05/06 ? 6) Why the Consigner should wait for such a long time for Consignee to take delivery ? 7) Please get the terms of sale.
In view of the circumstances outlined, we feel there is no liability on your part to make good this loss.”
12) The Complainant has averred in his complaint and in other documents also, that he has answered these queries vide its letter dtd.22/11/07, however, the Complainant has not attached this letter alongwith the complaint. Even the list of the documents mentioned at Sr.No.5 as 22/11/07 V Trans replied and answered all 7 queries but actually this documents is missing from the documents attached by the Complainant. Therefore, we minutely scrutinized the paging of the documents. The paging stares at page 13(1) showing the Transit-cum-Storage Policy on page 13/15 the Opposite Party No.1 has raised the 7 queries vide its letter dtd.29/10/07 and on next page i.e. pm 13/16, there is a letter dtd.08/12/07 and not dtd.22/11/07. This letter of the Complainant dtd.08/12/07 does not answer the said 7 queries raised by the Opposite Party No.1. The documents run from 13/1 to 13/36, however, we do not find this letter dtd.22/11/07 in these documents. The Complainant has submitted his “claim affidavit an written argument on 16/05/2011 but we do not find the above said document alongwith the claim affidavit or alongwith the written argument. It appears that the Complainant has purposely suppressed this document.
13) Therefore, as the relevant queries raised by the Opposite Party No.1 are not answered by the Complainant, the Opposite Party vide its letter dtd.09/02/09 has communicated the Complainant as “You have not submitted the required details in time to us the claims were closed as no claim long back.”.
14) Apart from the repudiating letter of the Opposite Party No.1, the Complainant has miserably failed to mention what was the property which was damaged/lost in the fire ? What was the valuation of these damaged property ? What are the documents supporting the claim ? When the incident was intimated to the Opposite Party No.1, etc. Therefore, the Complainant has miserably failed to establish the deficiency in service on the part of Opposite Party No.1. There is no allegations or complaint whatsoever, against Opposite Party No.2. Therefore, we do not find any merit in this complaint and in view of the above observation we passed the following order -
O R D E R
i)Complaint No.245/2010 is hereby dismissed with no order as to cost.
ii)Copy of this order be furnished to both the parties.
