Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/153/2021

Chief Medical Hall - Complainant(s)

Versus

National Insurance Company - Opp.Party(s)

Mukand Gupta

02 Jun 2023

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-I,

U.T. CHANDIGARH

 

                    

Consumer Complaint No.	:	CC/153/2021
Date of Institution	:	8.3.2021
Date of Decision	:	2.6.2023

 

Chief Medical Hall, through its Partners Anuj, son of Sh. Om  Parkash Gupta resident of house No.3113/1, Sector 47-D, Chandigarh and Gurpal Sharma, son of K.K. Sharma resident of house No.1025, Sector 48, Chandigarh.

 

… Complainant

V E R S U S

1.   National Insurance Company through its District Manager, Branch No.1, SCO No.85-86, Sector 17-D, Chandigarh.

2.   Pukhraj Singh Surveyor, Protech Insurance Surveyor and Loss Assessor, SCO No.40, Phase IX, SAS Nagar Mohali.  

   … Opposite Parties

 

CORAM :	PAWANJIT SINGH	PRESIDENT
	SURESH KUMAR SARDANA	MEMBER

                       

ARGUED BY		Mukund Gupta, counsel for complainant. Sh. Sukaam Gupta, counsel for OP No.1. OP No.2 exparte.

Per SURESH KUMAR SARDANA, Member

1. Briefly stated, the complainant which is a partnership concern run by its partners for earning livelihood purchased an insurance against fire valid from 25.7.2018 to 24.7.2019 having coverage of goods of Rs.55.00 lakh. It is alleged that at the time of issuance of cover note no terms and conditions were issued to the complainant. During the currency of the policy on 1.11.2018 in the late evening fire took place in the premises of the complainant due to short circuit.  Immediately the fire brigade called from Mohali to extinguish the fire.  The medicine lying in the premises were damaged due to fire, smoke and water. The complainant lodged DDR with the police on 2.11.2018 and also intimated the OPs.  The estimated loss of Rs.50,64,435/- was prepared. The Insurance company appointed the surveyor to examine the loss supplied by the complainant. The complainant supplied all the purchase bills of the stock with value and made his statement also.   It is alleged that on the insistence of the surveyor the complainant reduced his claim to Rs.33,50,967/- but still the surveyor while preparing the survey report by spilting  the stock and by making various illegal deductions reduced the claim to the tune of
   Rs.24,62,315.31. Since the medicines stocks were hypothecated with the IndusInd Bank from where the complainant has taken the C.C. limit, therefore, the amount assessed to the tune of Rs.24,62,315/- was directly paid by the insurance company to the said bank on 28.3.2019.  It is alleged that the OPs company paid Rs.8,88,652/- less to the complainant against the loss of Rs.33,50,967/-. Alleging the aforesaid act of Opposite Parties deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on their part, this complaint has been filed.
2. The Opposite Parties NO.1 in its reply while admitting the factual matrix of the case stated that the complainant was issued Standard Fire and Special Peril Policy alongwith terms and conditions.  It is admitted that the complainant intimated the loss in question to the answering insurance company and accordingly a surveyor was appointed to assess the loss and thereafter the said surveyor after doing the physical inspection and while considering the terms and conditions of the insurance policy assessed the loss to the tune of Rs.24,62,315.31. Accordingly the insurance company paid the loss  assessed by the surveyor as per settled law. It  is denied that there is any deficiency on the part of the answering  OP.  All other allegations made in the complaint has been  denied being wrong.
3. OP No.2 did not turn up despite due service, hence vide order dated 11.06.2021, it was proceeded against exparte.
4. Complainant chose not to file rejoinder.
5. Contesting parties led evidence by way of affidavits and documents.
6. We have heard the learned counsel for the contesting parties and gone through the record of the case.
7. The  main case of the complainant is that inspite of having proper fire insurance policy cover OPs did not settle its claim submitted after the fire incident in the premises of the complainant.
8. We have perused the surveyor report Annexure
   C-17,  placed on record by the complainant itself. The surveyor  has assessed gross loss of Rs.29,51,930.73P and net liability of the insurer towards the damaged stock have been worked out to Rs.24,62,315.31 P. The surveyor report has covered all the critical points. Thus, we do not find any reason to interfere with the report of surveyor being correct.  The  Hon’ble National Commission in New India Assurance Company Ltd. Vs. Rabindra Narayan I (2010) CPJ 80 (NC) held as under:-

“The Report submitted by the Surveyor is an important piece of evidence and has to be given due weight and relied upon until and unless it is proved by some cogent and reliable evidence that the Report submitted could not be relied upon.”

9.  The complainant has failed to rebut the surveyor report by way of any cogent documentary evidence, hence, the complainant has failed to prove his case. The principle of law laid down in the aforesaid judgment is squarely applicable in the instant case. Thus, the complaint has no merit.
10.  In view of the aforesaid discussion, the present consumer complaint, being devoid of any merit, is hereby dismissed leaving the parties to bear their own costs.
11.     Certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. The file be consigned

			sd/- [Pawanjit Singh]
			President
			sd/-
			[Suresh Kumar Sardana]
mp			Member