Punjab

Nawanshahr

CC/51/2015

M/s Mann Fashions - Complainant(s)

Versus

National Insurance Company - Opp.Party(s)

Ravinder Parmar

18 Mar 2016

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

SHAHEED BHAGAT SINGH NAGAR

Consumer Complaint No.       :  51 of 14.05.2015

Date of Decision:                    :  18.03.2016

1.       M/s Mann Fashions, NRI Complex, Chandigarh Road, Nawanshahr, District Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar through Varun Behal its Sole Proprietor.

2.       Varun Behal aged 25 years S/o Sudhir Behal R/o Prem Nagar Nawanshahr, District Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar

                                                                             …Complainants

Versus

National Insurance Company Limited, Chandigarh Road, Nawanshahr, District Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar through its Branch Manager.

                                                                    …Opposite Party

                             Complaint under the Provisions of Consumer Protection Act, 1986

QUORUM:

SH.G.K. DHIR, PRESIDENT

MS.SUSHMA HANDOO, MEMBER

 

COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES:

For complainants                    :         Sh.Ravinder Parmar, Advocate

For OP                           :         Sh.Nipun Bhalla, Advocate

 

ORDER

          PER SH.G.K. DHIR, PRESIDENT

1.       Complainant No.1, a sole proprietorship concern, is run by complainant No.2 for carrying on the business of sale of stitched and unstitched lady suits, sarees and other dress material.  This business carried in NRI Complex situate Opposite ITI on Chandigarh Road Nawanshahr in rented premises.  Complainants got their business insured for Rs.2,00,00,000/- by paying premium of Rs.12,921/-.  Policy No.401803/46/12/7500000112 with validity from 31.12.2012 to 30.12.2013 was issued.  On night intervening between 29.05.2013 and 30.05.2013, theft took place in said premises and thereafter FIR No.83 dated 30.05.2013 was lodged with city police station of SBS Nagar against unknown persons.  OP even was informed about this incidence. After close scrutiny of the stock in trade, it was found that about 590 stitched and un- stitched lady suits as well sarees and one LCD were stolen.  Total value of these stolen articles given in the complaint as Rs.16,53,160/-.  OP deployed M/s Bhadra Insurance and Loss Assessor Pvt. Ltd, who visited the spot.  Required documents were duly supplied to the said surveyor.  Letter No.1298 dated 05.09.2013 was received by complainant from OPs in compliance of which complainant visited Delhi for meeting the Surveyor and loss assessors, who assured that loss suffered by complainant will be duly compensated by OP.  Another FIR No.87 dated 13.06.2013 under Section 379 and 411 IPC was registered at Police Station, City Ropar because recovery of 274 stitched and unstitched lady suits with stickers of Mann Fashions Nawanshahr and LCD was affected there from the house of accused persons on 13.06.2013.  On 25.07.2013, 22 stitched and unstitched lady suits more were recovered from house of accused persons.  274 suits and LCD were duly received by complainant No.2, but he yet to receive the recovered 22 suits referred above.  Out of the recovered 274 suits, about 50 suits were totally damaged qua which intimation was given to the surveyor and loss assessor regarding which Fard Shanakat even was submitted.  On 29.05.2013, the complainants were having stock of about Rs.81,50,000/-.  Complainants claims to have suffered loss of Rs.16,53,160/-.  Though complainants approached OP number of times and completed the requirements contemplated through letter dated 05.09.2013, but despite the repeated assurances given by OP, they failed to do the needful and lastly refused to do needful about one week prior to filing of the complaint.  Direction sought against OP for calling upon them to pay Rs.9,53,160/- on account of loss suffered by complainants due to theft.  Interest @18% from 30.05.2013 onwards even claimed.  Compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- even claimed by pleading deficiency in service on part of OP.   

2.       In written statement filed by OP, it is pleaded inter alia as if complaint is premature; complainants has no cause of action; complainants have not approached the Forum with clean hands and complaint is not in proper form. It is further claimed that the claim submitted by complainants has not been repudiated yet.  Rather, it is claimed that claim could not be finalized due to non-cooperation of complainants.  On account of non-submission of documents demanded from complainant vide letters dated 20.06.2015 and 05.09.2013, the claim considered as “No Claim”.  Even the appointed surveyor has not been provided documents despite reminders dated 20.06.2013 and 28.03.2014.  On 08.08.2014 due intimation regarding this was sent to complainant through registered letter.  The submitted claim is highly exaggerated, arbitrary and speculative, having no relevancy to the alleged sustained loss.  OP deployed Bhadra Insurance surveyors and loss assessor Pvt Ltd, who visited the spot and inspected the same.  Despite various reminders, complainants have not supplied the required documents to process the claim, due to which file was closed as “No Claim”.  Requisite ingredients not mentioned in the complaint.  Information regarding total damage of 50 suits was given to the surveyors, but facts in that respect never brought to the notice of insurance company, due to which liability with respect to this claim of OP denied.  All the figures of stock in trade, loss and claim alleged to be vague. As complainants failed to comply with the mandatory requirements of OP and as such they have no cause of action.  Each and every other averment of the complaint denied.  

3.       Complainants to prove their case tendered in evidence affidavit Ex.CW1/A of Sh.Varun Behal, Proprietor alongwith documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-19 and then counsel for complainants closed the evidence. On the other hand counsel for OP tendered in evidence affidavit Ex.OPA of Sh.Param Pal Singh Sr. Branch Manager alongwith photocopies of documents i.e. Ex.OP-1 to Ex.OP-5 and then closed the evidence.

4.       Written arguments submitted by counsel for the parties and oral arguments addressed by both the parties heard. Records gone through minutely. 

5.       Copy of the rent note Ex.C-1 produced by complainants to prove that the NRI complex used by them as tenants.  Ex.C-2 is the copy of the insurance cover note produced by complainants to show that the premises in question was insured with respect to the business of cloth and allied materials.  It is admitted by OP in their written as well oral arguments  that premises were insured and after receipt of intimation of theft qua which report Ex.C-3 lodged with police station, the surveyor was appointed.  Ex.C-4=Ex.OP-2 is the letter sent by surveyor to complainants for calling upon them to submit the requisite documents. Ex.C-5 is the copy of the Fard Shanakhat (Identification of recovered articles prepared by police), but Ex.C-6 to Ex.C-19 is the record of business transactions or of the list of the recovered suits or copy of lay out of showroom etc. maintained by complainants.  Ex.OP-1 is the letter sent by surveyor appointed by OP to complainants for calling upon them to submit information regarding the list of requirements. Ex.OP-3 to  Ex.OP-5 are the other documents produced by OP to show that complainants failed to comply with the requirement of submitting documents despite reminders and as such submissions of counsel for OP has force that OP has been calling upon the complainants to comply with requirements, so that claim may be processed properly.  It is submitted through written arguments that some of documents alone produced, but not all the documents, from which inference of amount of loss on account of theft, can be drawn properly and as such there is malafide on part of complainants.  It is also contended through written arguments that complainants even at present not ready with remaining documents, which are required for due processing of claim.  Counsel for complainants on the other hand contends that whatever documents available, those have been supplied.

6.       After considering the above said submissions advanced by counsel for the parties and perusing the records referred above, it is made out that though complainants lodged complaint regarding theft with police and even submitted claim, but the said claim could not be finalized due to non-submission of whole of the record, despite reminders.  In Para No.1 of the preliminary objections of the written statement itself, it has been alleged by OP that complaint is premature because claim has not been repudiated yet.  In view of this specific plea of the written statement, it has to be held that virtually OP has not repudiated the claim till date.  Complainants can hand over so much of the documents as available with them and as such the complaint deserves to be disposed of in terms that on submission of the available documents by complainants with OP within 15 days from today, OP will decide the claim within three months therefrom.  Photostat copies of documents already produced on the file of this Forum also will be handed over by complainants to OP within the above referred period.  In case the more sought documents not available with complainants, then complainants will have to submit affidavits qua non-availability of those document/documents.      

               

7.       In view of the above discussion, the present complaint is disposed of in terms that complainants will hand over available sought documents by OP within 15 days from today.  The Photostat copies of documents already produced in the file of this Forum will also be handed over by complainants to OP within that period. After receipt of these documents, OP will decide the claim within three months therefrom.  In case any sought documents not available with the complainants, then complainants will have to submit affidavits qua non availability of that document/documents.

8.       No order as to costs

9.       The certified copies of this order be supplied to the parties free of costs, as per rules and the file be indexed and consigned to the Record Room.

Dated:  18.03.2016

 

  

(Sushma Handoo)                                                        (G.K. Dhir)

Member                                                                         President