In  the  Court  of  the

Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Unit -I, Kolkata,

8B, Nelie Sengupta Sarani, Kolkata-700087.

CDF/Unit-I/Case No.   199 / 2009.

1)                   Riga Sugar Company Limited,

14, Netaji Subhas Road, Kolkata-700001.                                                ---------- Complainant

---Versus---

1)                   Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd.,

Through its Branch Manager,

Himalaya House, 38B, J.L> Nehru Road, Kolkata-71.                              ---------- Opposite Party

Present :           Sri Sankar Nath Das, President.

                        Dr. A. B. Chakraborty, Member

Order No.   2 8    Dated  2 0 / 0 2 / 2 0 1 2 .

The petition of complaint u/s 12 of the C.P. Act, 1986 has been filed by the complainant Riga Sugar Co. Ltd. against the o.p. Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd. The case of the complainant in short is that complainant has taken an Industry Care Policy no.1501072615000010 for the period of 1.8.07 to 31.7.08 and the premium was fixed at Rs.10,76,150/-. The policy included burglary and house breaking. On 4.12.07 on burglary and house breaking occurred in the premises of the complainant company and the complainant discovered it at about 7-00 a.m. The company suffered a loss of Rs.8,57,000/- (approx). The incident was informed to Riga P.S. Sitamari, Bihar and FIR was lodged and also o.p. was informed through a letter dt.10.12.07. Riga P.S. on investigation submitted the final report stating that theft was occurred. O.p. appointed their surveyor M/s R.K. Gaur & Co. of Gorakhpur and the surveyor visited the company premises on 20.12.07 and 22.12.07 and assessed the loss. On 11.2.09 o.p. settled the claim by issuing a cheque of Rs.2,55,000/- to the complainant. Complainant thinks that the settlement amount is much less than the assessed loss. Complainant accepted the cheque without prejudiced and requested the o.p. to send information about the basis of settlement of the claim and requested for sanction of Rs.6,02,000/- more for full and final settlement, but o.p. turned deaf ear in spite of receiving advocate’s notice. Hence the instant case.

            O.p. had entered its appearance in this case by filing w/v and denied all the material allegations labeled against it and prayed for dismissal of the case.

Decision with reasons:-

            We have gone through the pleadings of the parties, evidence and documents in particular. It is not disputed by o.p. in their w/v and evidence that Rs.4,14,796/- is their liability being 65% of the loss. That being the position o.p. already paid Rs.2,55,000/- and in view of the above position complainant is entitled to get a sum of Rs.(4,14,796 – 2,55,000) = Rs.1,59,796/-. It is clear that o.p. had clear deficiency in discharging its liabilities properly being a service provider to its consumer / complainant and complainant is entitled to relief as prayed for.

            Hence, ordered,

            That the petition of complainant is allowed on contest against the o.p. with cost. O.p. is directed to pay a sum of Rs.1,59,796/- (Rupees one lakh fifty nine thousand seven hundred ninety six) only together with interest @ 9% p.a. from the sate of claim till the date of realization to the complainant. O.p. is further directed to pay compensation of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees fifteen thousand) only for harassment and mental agony and litigation cost of Rs.3000/- (Rupees three thousand) only within 45 days from the date of communication of this order, i.d. an interest @ 9% p.a. shall accrue over the entire sum due to the credit of the complainant till full realization.

            Supply certified copy of this order to the parties

   _____Sd-_____                                                   ______Sd-______

     MEMBER                                                           PRESIDENT