Haryana

Karnal

CC/604/2021

M/s Karna Paints Private Limited - Complainant(s)

Versus

Oriental Insurance Company Limited - Opp.Party(s)

Kanav Deep Singh

05 Sep 2022

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KARNAL.

 

                                                        Complaint No.604 of 2021

                                                     Date of instt. 27.10.2021

                                                     Date of decision 05.09.2022

 

M/s Karna Paints Pvt. Ltd. Unit no.1, 120 K.M. Stone, G.T. road Karnal, through its Managing Director Shri Birinder Singh (Aadhaar no.5253 4808 1109).

 

      …….Complainant 

                                        Versus

 

Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. above Hero Honda Agency opposite Bus Stand Mahila Aashram, 1^st floor Karnal through its authorized signatory/person.

 

    …..Opposite Parties.

 

Complaint Under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

               

Before   Sh. Jaswant Singh……President.       

      Sh.Vineet Kaushik ………..Member

              Dr. Rekha Chaudhary…..Member

 

 Present: Shri Kanav Deep, counsel for the complainant.

                Shri Ramesh Chaudhary, counsel for the OP.

 

                (Jaswant Singh President)

 

ORDER:  

                 

                 The complainant has filed the present complaint Under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the opposite party (hereinafter referred to as ‘OP’) on the averments that complainant purchased a standard fire and special perils policy from the OP, vide policy no.261301/11/2020/87, valid from 14.06.2019 to 13.06.2020. In the abovesaid insurance policy Rs.6,60,00,000/-amount was covered for any loss to stock, plant, machinery, furniture and fixture, empty container, A.C., A.C. Plants, Computer, UPS, Printers etc. of the complainant company for that purpose complainant have paid Rs.2,15,845/- as premium of the abovesaid policy. The said policy was issued on 31.05.2019. It is further averred that complainant has been renewing the said policy from last more than three years. On 18.05.2020 fire took place in the premises of complainant because of that complainant’s company has suffered a heavy loss and intimation regarding the said fire was conveyed to the OP on 19.05.2020, on which OP through his surveyor after inspecting the premises of complainant, has made assessment report of loss of Rs.1,24,48,044/- and told the complainant that soon this amount will be given to him. The OP has made the payment of Rs.1,23,14,027/- instead of Rs. 1,24,48,044/-Thereafter, complainant requested the OP so many times for making payment of the balance amount of Rs.1,34,017/- but OP did not pay any heed to the request of OP. In this way there was deficiency in service on the part of the OP. Hence this complaint.

2.             On notice, OP appeared and filed its written version raising preliminary objections with regard to maintainability; locus standi and concealment of true and material facts. On merits, it is pleaded that OP has already paid the claim amount according to ambit/limitation of the policy in question. It is further pleaded that inadvertently the claim of the complainant was assessed by the surveyor for Rs.1,24,48,044/- which includes Rs.1,34,017/- of loss on account of furniture and fixture in the premises of complainant. Infact, the loss towards fixture and furniture was not covered under the policy in question. It is clear from the policy that the risk cover was for the stock for Rs.4,10,00,000/- and paint and machinery was for Rs.2,50,00,000/- total sum insured vide the policy in question was Rs.6,50,00,000/-. The fact about the non coverance of furniture and fixture were disclosed to the insured/complainant before settlement of the claim. After that the total claim of the complainant of Rs.1,23,14,027/- paid to the complainant, which was duly received by the complainant, vide issuing discharge voucher dated 12.10.2021, declaring there in that, “I hereby accept from the Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. the sum of Rs.1,23,14,023/-(approved net claim) in full and final settlement of claim for the loss of property which occurred on 18.05.2020 covered under the policy no.261301/11/2020/87 for the period from 14.06.2019 to 13.06.2020. It is further declared by the complainant that I hereby voluntarily give/discharge receipt to the company in full and final settlement of claims present or future arising directly/indirectly in respect of said loss. I also subrogate all my rights and remedies to the company in respect of the above loss/damages”. It is further pleaded that the abovesaid amount received by the complainant without any protest. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the OP. The other allegations made in the complaint have been denied by the OP and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

3.             Parties then led their respective evidence.

4.             Learned counsel for complainant has tendered into evidence affidavit of Birinder Singh Managing Director Ex.CW1/A, copy of insurance policy Ex.C1, copy of premium receipt Ex.C2, copy of standard fire and special perils policy-endorsement schedule Ex.C3, copy of handwritten policy detail Ex.C4, copy of email Ex.C5, copy of provisional covernote Ex.C6, copy of fire provisional covernote Ex.C7, copy of Aadhar card Ex.C7 and closed the evidence on 04.03.2022 by suffering separate statement.

5.             On the other hand, learned counsel for OP has tendered into evidence affidavit of Sanjeev Madaan, Senior Divisional Manager Ex.OPW1/A, copy of insurance policy Ex.OP1, copy of endorsement on policy Ex.OP2, copy of email dated 10.12.2021 Ex.OP3, copy of discharge voucher dated 12.10.2021 Ex.OP4 and closed the evidence on 26.04.2022 by suffering separate statement.

6.             We have heard the learned counsel of the parties and perused the case file carefully and have also gone through the evidence led by the parties.

7.             Learned counsel for complainant, while reiterating the contents of complaint, has vehemently argued that complainant had purchased a standard fire and special perils policy from the OP. On 18.05.2020 fire took place in the premises of complainant because of which complainant’s company has suffered a heavy loss and intimation regarding the said fire was sent to the OP on 19.05.2020. OP appointed a surveyor to investigate the matter and after inspection, the surveyor has made assessment report of loss of Rs.1,24,48,044/- but the OP has made the payment of Rs.1,23,14,027/- instead of Rs. 1,24,48,044/- being less of amount of Rs.1,34,017/-. OP did not disclose the reason for the said less amount and lastly prayed for allowing the complaint.

8.             Learned counsel for OP, while reiterating the contents of written version, has vehemently argued that OP has already paid the claim to the complainant. The claim of the complainant was assessed by the surveyor for Rs.1,24,48,044/- which includes Rs.1,34,017/- of loss on account of furniture and fixture in the premises of complainant. The loss towards fixture and furniture was not covered under the policy in question. The fact about the non coverance of furniture and fixture were disclosed to the insured/complainant before settlement of the claim. After that the total claim of the complainant of Rs.1,23,14,027/- paid to the complainant, which was duly received by the complainant, vide issuing discharge voucher dated 12.10.2021 as full and final settlement and lastly prayed for dismissal of complaint.  

9.             We have duly considered the rival contention of the parties.

10.           Admittedly, the fire took place in the premises of the complainant during the subsistence of the policy. It is also admitted fact that after receiving the intimation regarding the incident, the surveyor has been appointed by the OP, who assessed the loss of to the tune of Rs.1,24,48,044/- but OP has only paid Rs.1,23,14,027/- to the complainant.

11.           As per the version of the complainant, surveyor of the OP has assessed the loss to the tune of Rs. 1,24,48,044/- but OP has only paid Rs.1,23,14,027/- to the complainant therefore, OP be directed to pay the remaining amount.

12.           Now the question arises for consideration whether the OP has rightly deducted the amount of Rs.1,34,017/- from the claim amount or not?

13.           Admittedly, complainant has received Rs.1,23,14,027/- from the OP. Furthermore, the said amount has been received by the complainant as full and final settlement after signing the satisfaction voucher Ex.OP4 dated 12.10.2021.

14.            It is well settled proposition of law that where one of the parties to contract issues full and final settlement voucher (or no dues certificate as the case may be) confirming that he has received the payment in full and final settlement of all claims and he has no outstanding claim, that amounts to discharge of contract by acceptance of performance and the party issuing discharge voucher/ certificate cannot thereafter made any fresh claim or revive any settled claim. In this regard we are relying upon the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in National Insurance Company Versus Boghana Poly Pvt. Ltd. 2009(1) SCC 267 and in New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Genus Power Infrastructure Ltd. 2015 AIR SCW 67, the Hon’ble Supreme Court dismissed the claim on the ground that complainant had accepted the payment in full and final settlement of claim. Hon’ble National Commission in Andhra Fabrics Pvt. Ltd. Vs. United India Insurance company Ltd. 2015(2) CPR 482 (N.C.) and A.P.Jos Versus ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd. 2013(2) CPC 391 (N.C.)  and Hon’ble Haryana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Panchkula  in first appeal no.288 of 2016 titled as Shri Ram General Insurance company Ltd. Versus Bhag Singh relied upon the aforecited judgments of Hon’ble Supreme Court held that when the complainant had accepted the payment in full and final settlement of the claim he cannot make any fresh claim or revive the settled claim.

15.           Keeping in view, the ratio of the law laid down in aforesaid judgments, facts and circumstances of the case, the complainant, after issuing satisfaction voucher accepting the amount of Rs.1,23,14,027/- as full and final settlement of the his claim, cannot revive his claim. Thus, the complainant is not entitled for the remaining amount as claimed by him.

16.           Thus, as a sequel to abovesaid discussion, the present complaint is devoid of any merits and same deserves to be dismissed and same is hereby dismissed. No order as to costs. The parties concerned be communicated the order accordingly, and the file be consigned to the record room, after due compliance.

Announced

Dated:05.09.2022

                                                                 President,

                                                      District Consumer Disputes

                                                      Redressal Commission, Karnal.

 

                (Vineet Kaushik)                (Dr. Rekha Chaudhary)

                           Member                          Member